# Xyscreen comparison review



## nielvm

Hi all,


I recently compared different fabric types from the relatively unnown manufacturer xyscreens from China. I wrote a review for the dutch home theater forum, perhaps this review interests you guys as well, so I took the liberty to translate and post here. 

Don't really know if there is a place for user reviews around here, if I posted in a wrong place, please let me know.

I don't have any benefits or professional connections with the factory. The following impressions are stricktly my own.

Quite a long review, sorry for the long-read


----------



## nielvm

Recently I became acquainted with the company xyscreen from China. They have a whole army of canvas types in their store that you can buy directly from the factory.

I contacted them because it seemed interesting to me to review these fabrics. The contact via email went very smoothly, I usually had a response after fifteen minutes. It was therefore no problem to get samples for a review, only the shipping costs would be for my account. Unfortunately, these amounted to around 60 dollars. A bit pricey to write a review just out of interest.

So I asked for the cost of a whole sreen. The cheapest screen fabric costs only about 8 dollars per m². For the transparent cloths you pay somewhere between 20 and 30 dollars per m², their most expensive cloth (soundmax 5HG) costs about 86dollar per m². For my situation (2.40: 1 screen of 2.8m x 1.2m) this came at about $ 100 + $ 80 shipping. I then took a leap and ordered a soundmax 4k cloth for my screen. This canvas has a specified gain of 1.1. Because I had noticed in a previous tests that the suppliers were rather generous with the gain values, I asked about this. It was admitted that this could deviate to at least 0.97. In my case this means about 20% more light, quite interesting.

I also asked, if I still paid the shipment, to send different samples. Always interesting to view other types of canvas.

Yesterday the cloths were delivered neatly in a very sturdy cardboard tube. As far as communication with the company and the delivery (term) are concerned, I can only be positive. Always a reassurance when it comes to such distances.

The method of testing is the same as when I compared different types of canvas to a forum companion. The canvases are stuck one by one with some painting tape and the greyscale is calibrated. Then I check which light output is achieved compared to my existing fabric. In my next calculations, I assume that:

A kingpin screen has a gain of 1.0
My screen has a gain of about 0.8 (tested in previous comparison)

In addition to the gain, other aspects such as the sharpness, the presence of sparkle or moire and other things (negative) are also looked at. I also mention whether the canvas can also be used for 8k projection. I do not know how XYscreen determines the latter, but I'll give it anyway.

The measurements are carried out with an Epson TW9300 projecting 2.8 meters wide from 4.5 meters. The current milliskin measures about 16.5 ftl on this.









Tube for shipping









Different samples









Test method

*Soundmax 4k*

I also ordered this canvas in the format of my screen as this was the most interesting cloth in terms of specifications. It has a specified gain of 1.1 and could also be used for 8k projectors due to the fine weave of the fabric. I find this a not unimportant fact. Since you do not replace your screen or canvas every year (oops, 2nd time this year ...), this has to be very future-proof.


Measurements:
21.5 ft
Gain value approximately 1.1

Review

A sturdy, non-stretched cloth that is the only woven fabric. I am very pleased that this is the canvas that I have ordered in large. Since this canvas has a higher gain compared to my current one, I have tried to measure the difference in black value. With my current canvas I measure 0,003ftl at 0% white, with the soundmax 4k I get the same settings at 0,0038ftl. However, if I adjust the manual iris of the projector to 16.5ftl (current cloth, iris -17), I measure 0.0025ftl.

It should also be noted that the greyscale calibrates much more easily than the milliskin. The latter is actually not designed for projection, but sure, given its price, very nice.

Sharpness and other things are very difficult to compare on a small piece of cloth. Further impressions will follow according to the whole canvas.









Soundmax 4k left part of the face, milliskin right

Impressions full canvas
Hanging the cloth tight is quite a task as the canvas is quite heavy and rigid. Have just asked the question if it can be ironed slightly. When projected everything seems super-thight, but when the spotlights go above the screen, you see some wrinkles.
Light output has remained unchanged

Overall very neat image, the extra brightness is really noticeable. Even HDR films are already presentable in cinema mode (color filter on the TW9300 that takes light away, but creates a broader range of colors).

The canvas is still slightly translucent, so that the framework of the frame can be seen in very exceptional cases. Make sure the wall behind the screen is dark.

*Soundmax 5*

This canvas has a specified gain of 1.2 and has miniscule perforated openings (0.5mm) in the fabric to let the sound through. In contrast to the soundmax 4K, the manufacturer indicates that this fabric is not suitable for projection higher than 4K.

Measurements: 

22.5ftl
Gain value approximately 1.15

Review 

In terms of gain value negligible with the soundmax 4k. However, the holes are much larger than the woven structure of the 4k. Also make sure that you use the right side with this cloth, the wrong side shines quite a bit. The soundmax 5 is a lot more expensive than the 4k and personally I think the 4k even better.


* Black crystal / black crystal HG / black crystal acoustically transparent *

The ALR (ambient light rejection) screens from XYscreen. Although I project in a darkened dedicated space and therefore do not benefit from such a screen, it seemed interesting to me to request these frabrics as a sample. The given gain is 0.8 / 2.0 and 0.75 respectively.

 Review 
I had to get acquainted with the canvases to write something sensible about it. I had started putting up the canvas just like the others and measuring it, but it did not work that well. The results are very much dependent on the angle in which you set up the meter. Putting the meter at right angles to the screen is not so easy because you are in the shade of the meter, or you really have to measure in the corners of your screen. And do you measure such a cloth with or without ambient light? Not easy.

With the other canvases the emphasis was mainly on the gain, or how much light the screen radiates on a test pattern of 100% white. This I also wanted to check with the black crystal, but turned out to be very disappointing. After much thought, this seemed to me to be a wrong approach.
When you project with ambient light, you notice that the colors and the black regions are immediately laundered. The brightest regions generally remain reasonably good. To judge these ALR substances, it seems to me fairer to see how well the darker regions are displayed with ambient light instead of. to focus on the clear regions.

Generally speaking, I can say that the ALR canvases do what they serve: to counteract ambient light. You clearly notice that the contrast stays upright in ambient light, when it collapses like a pudding at the soundmax4k. There is very little difference in projection with or without ambient light. Quite handy if you have a space where you sometimes suffer from ambient light, but sometimes also completely obscured.
Important detail: the cloths will only block the ambient light that is incident at an angle on the screen. In my case there are 9 spots in a cove built around the screen. This can filter out the canvases well. However, if you are in a room where the sun is shining in the same direction as the projector ... Now, no cloth will be able to withstand this.

If you look at the gain value of the cloths (at sight, reasons above), the standard black crystal is clearly a bit darker than the soundmax4k. The absolute black is clearly a lot lower, but the absolute white is that too. In comparison with the soundmax4k, white clouds are rather gray. If there is no comparison, you obviously have less problems with this (just as with black values). If you do not project too large and have a light output "too much", this cloth can be a nice addition to get deeper black.

The acoustically transparent black crystal is identical to the "normal" black crystal, but is perforated and therefore the gain is still a tad lower.

With the high gain black crystal it becomes really interesting. In a darkened room the image is very close to the soundmax4k. Since the latter has a gain of about 1.1, it is a mystery to me how to get 2.0 for the HG black crystal, but ... we focused on the image and not on the numbers.
When the ambient light comes on, the canvas retains its beautiful image, with the only side effect a very slight appearance in higher regions. From the above canvases I would choose the high gain version for a situation with ambient light. However, unlike the acoustic substances, I can not compare with other brands.









Black crystal left, HG version right. (darkened environment)
HG black crystal very similar to soundmax4









Idem, with ambient light









Darkened room









With ambient light.
Look especially at the color of the sky. That washes away on the soundmax4k cloth, stays neatly on the (HG) black crystal










Black crystal: deeper black, less bright white


----------



## nielvm

Will correct some grammar and picture links soon... 

Excuse me for my non-native English


----------



## nielvm

In a previous test, I calculated the gain of other accoustically transparant screens:

Seymour AV centerstage XD 0,97 gain 
Elitescreen UHD 0,92 gain 
Milliskin 17,1 0,79 gain 
Seymour centerstage 0,79 gain 
Dreamscreen 0,73 gain 
Elitescreen 1080p3 0,69 gain


----------



## Lygren

Nice, but when testing for light reflection values you would need to use a light blocking black backing on each sample as you would otherwise measure the combined reflection of the fabric in the back and front you wish to find the value off of.  You might have done so, but from your pictures it seems as if you perhaps are not?


----------



## nielvm

Lygren said:


> Nice, but when testing for light reflection values you would need to use a light blocking black backing on each sample as you would otherwise measure the combined reflection of the fabric in the back and front you wish to find the value off of.  You might have done so, but from your pictures it seems as if you perhaps are not?


I first tested the soundmax 4k with a black backing compared to directly on the existing milliskin. Since there was no significant difference, I tested all the other fabrics directly on the milliskin. 

Also, after I had attached the whole soundmax 4k screen on my frame, the ftl readings remained the same.

In therms of absolute gain values, you're right that the values might be a bit off, but the comparison between the fabrics should be correct. Also, because I have no idea what gain 1.0 would be, I assumed that kingpin had a gain of 1.0. All the other gains are calculated on this assumption.


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> I first tested the soundmax 4k with a black backing compared to directly on the existing milliskin. Since there was no significant difference, I tested all the other fabrics directly on the milliskin.
> 
> Also, after I had attached the whole soundmax 4k screen on my frame, the ftl readings remained the same.
> 
> In therms of absolute gain values, you're right that the values might be a bit off, but the comparison between the fabrics should be correct. Also, because I have no idea what gain 1.0 would be, I assumed that kingpin had a gain of 1.0. All the other gains are calculated on this assumption.


OK, there is certainly a potential significant impact depending on the perforation level of the fabric tested not adding a black backing I´m afraid... Perhaps the initial "soundmax" fabric is quite solid? Anyhows, I would recommend that you add a backing if you do want to use the figures as a basis of deciding on a fabric.


----------



## Lygren

Lygren said:


> OK, there is certainly a potential significant impact depending on the perforation level of the fabric tested not adding a black backing I´m afraid... Perhaps the initial "soundmax" fabric is quite solid? Anyhows, I would recommend that you add a backing if you do want to use the figures as a basis of deciding on a fabric.


As for the Kingpin fabric, if it does use one of those semi-shiny PVC fabrics those Chinese manufacturers often tend to favour, the gain might be a bit higher than 1.0. You should try to get ahold of a Stewart Studiotek 100 sample as a reference if possible, one of the very few PVC based fabrics out there actually depicting gain just about 100% accurate...


----------



## Skylinestar

Any moire?


----------



## DavidK442

Have you compared the SoundMax4K to your sample of XD? Less texture/more texture/about the same?

The picture of SoundMax4K on the manufacturer's website looks similar to a sunshade material that has been used for many years as an acoustically transparent screen.
It is a product from Phifer called Sheerweave 4500 and is available here in North America from a DIY screen supplier named Carl's Place.
https://www.carlofet.com/projector-screen-material/sheerweave-projector-screen-material.html

Would be interesting to know the degree of sound blockage with these fabrics. You don't happen to have a $150 UMIK-1 calibrated mic do you?

Thanks for taking the time to have a look at these samples. Always interesting to see what is available for DIY screen materials.

There was a great projection screen comparison report that came out a couple years ago. Covers many of the regular manufacturers, but not the newer companies of course.
https://www.accucalav.com/wp-content/uploads/accucal_front_projection_screen_report.pdf

By the way, your English is much better than on the XYSCREEN website.


----------



## nielvm

No moire, no...

Can’t compare to the fabric you are referring to, don’t know that one. 

We have tested all the samples for their accoustically transparant behavior with an umic microphone There really wasn’t that big a difference...


----------



## MJ DOOM

Great thread, I actually got a sample of the .8 gain Black Crystal coming tomorrow. Did you notice any hot spotting with the HG BC?


----------



## nielvm

Hot spotting is difficult to see with a small piece of fabric.

Personally I would prefer the HG over the regular Black crystal. Very nice fabric, only a minor bit of sparkle in the brightest regions. The regular Black crystal was too dark imo...


----------



## Frank714

Great review, many, many thanks. Couldn't have arrived at a better time as I was about this weekend to request some samples myself - apparently it has to be the Dark Crystal HG judging by its gain of 2.0 and the very graphic images you posted.


Thus far I've read conflicting stories whether such an ALR fabric could qualify as a substitute for the legendary Da-Lite High Power 2.8.
I'm currently not aware of an HP 2.8 owner who conducted such a comparison, so I decided to volunteer myself. 


Unless I missed that, I didn't read how you positioned your Epson front projector. Did you take images at projector lens level or further up or down (HP 2.8 was retro-reflective, yielding optimal results if projector lens and eyes are more or less on the same level!) 


I've heard stories that the Dark Crystal is also somewhat retro-reflective so positioning the front projector optimally could perhaps yield, further, better results.


I'd guess that the Dark Crystal fabrics are winners for rooms filled with ambient lights, but performance in a ambient light controlled room or even "batcave" next to a High Power 2.8 or an adequate substitute of similar making should be very interesting, IMHO.


IIRC the fabric is currently and exclusively only available for fixed frame solutions which isn't great news for users of electric or manual screens. Need to ask the manufacturer whether they got an enforced basic layer solution in the pipeline to meet the requirements for electric and manual screen applications.


----------



## nielvm

Hi,


Thank you, happy to read that the review is appreciated.

My Epson is almost centered to the screen (left-right as well as up-down).
The black crystal fabrics as shown in the pictures are hence a bit to the right and slightly upwards to the lens.

I don’t quite understand what you mean with retro-reflective? I assume light that travels through the fabric and reflects the wall behind?
The black crystal fabrics are completely black at the back side. No light shines through…

The HG black crystal really interested me. Even though the supposed gain of 2.0 is highly exaggerated i.m.o., the fabric really deepens the blacks without significantly pulling down the absolute whites.
The “regular” black crystal also deepens the blacks even further, but the whites suffer too much for this. I could live with the HG black crystal in my 100% light controlled room. The only downside is noticed was a bit of “sparkle” in the highest regions.

It really surprises me to see that other fabrics with a negative gain like the dreamscreen v6.0 also pull down the absolute whites (completely normal, gain


----------



## Frank714

nielvm said:


> I don’t quite understand what you mean with retro-reflective? I assume light that travels through the fabric and reflects the wall behind?



No, retro-reflective means that the screen throws the projector light in the same angle back it came in which enables the viewer in the central spot to get the brightest picture output from the front projector: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-screens/2925058-da-lite-high-power-equivalent-3.html#post56790258


From what I've read these ALR screens are supposedly mostly retro-reflective by nature. Traditional retro-reflective screens used glass beads with an average gain of 2.4. The High Power 2.8 used smaller glass-beads that were protected by a protective surface layer and had none of the side effects often encountered with these traditional 2.4 screens.


----------



## nielvm

Ow okay...

Be carefull with those really high-gain fabrics. Was usefull in the days that projectors didn't have that much output, but I wouldn't use them with the recent projectors, certainly not in SDR...


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Thank you, happy to read that the review is appreciated.
> 
> My Epson is almost centered to the screen (left-right as well as up-down).
> The black crystal fabrics as shown in the pictures are hence a bit to the right and slightly upwards to the lens.
> 
> I don’t quite understand what you mean with retro-reflective? I assume light that travels through the fabric and reflects the wall behind?
> The black crystal fabrics are completely black at the back side. No light shines through…
> 
> The HG black crystal really interested me. Even though the supposed gain of 2.0 is highly exaggerated i.m.o., the fabric really deepens the blacks without significantly pulling down the absolute whites.
> The “regular” black crystal also deepens the blacks even further, but the whites suffer too much for this. I could live with the HG black crystal in my 100% light controlled room. The only downside is noticed was a bit of “sparkle” in the highest regions.
> 
> It really surprises me to see that other fabrics with a negative gain like the dreamscreen v6.0 also pull down the absolute whites (completely normal, gain


----------



## nielvm

I wasn't comparing the V6 to the ALR fabrics. I meant that with the ALR fabrics you get something for the lower gain, which is a lot deeper blacks. The overall contrast shifts sort of speak.
With the V6 the lower gain didn't result in deeper blacks, thus resulting in a lower contrast ratio.

As said, all the measurements I made were compared to kingping as 1.0. If kingpin is slightly higher than 1.0 (as you stated), the ultraweave will be closer to .8 (and all the other given gains will be slightly higher)

The accoustic measurements were made with a friend. Mic at listening position, output at 75db, someone stretching the sample fabric as close to the loudspeaker as possible. I don't have the measurements at hand atm, but we both found the differences to be futile.


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> I wasn't comparing the ALR to the V6 to the ALR fabrics. I meant that with the ALR fabrics you get something for the lower gain, which is a lot deeper blacks. The overall contrast shifts sort of speak.
> With the V6 the lower gain didn't result in deeper blacks, thus resulting in a lower contrast ratio.
> 
> As said, all the measurements I made were compared to kingping as 1.0. If kingpin is slightly higher than 1.0 (as you stated), the ultraweave will be closer to .8 (and all the other given gains will be slightly higher)
> 
> The accoustic measurements were made with a friend. Mic at listening position, output at 75db, someone stretching the sample fabric as close to the loudspeaker as possible. I don't have the measurements at hand atm, but we both found the differences to be futile.


As for the screen "producing blacks"; the gamma should remain exactly as produced by the projector. Perhaps your comparison of the ALR screens with some ambient light / (re)reflection in the room made you come to the conclusion, but regardless, a screen is not supposed to alternate the gamma of which the projector produces. 

As for measuring AT, it´s really really hard... What we do is that we place each fabric piece into a properly insulated box, whereas the fabric sample is blocking the entire passage from where the audio sweep is produced to where the blockage is measured and we also need to use a fixed position for the microphone as even some mm deviation will alternative the measurements completely. Also, you should do sweeps with different dB´s and see how they react - for example a 60dB, 70dB, 80dB and 90dB sweep. Also, it might be a good idea to bear in mind a -3dB is actually twice the acoustical energy being blocked off...


----------



## nielvm

Completely agree that the accoustic measurement was a bit rudimentary. 
Only my center is behind the screen and I didn't notice much difference in sound reproduction. Re-measured it all with audyssey and here again, I don't see that the center has to be cranked up all of a sudden. For my taste the AT isn't a problem at all, no doubt there are other people with higher demands out there 

Since the ALR fabrics are dark grey on their own, they can pull down the deepest blacks, that has nothing to do with the room in my opinion. On the last picture you can see that the black sky/space is a lot darker on the ALR, but the white is also a bit less bright. That's what I mean with this fabric. The contrast of your image "shifts" a bit. I don't think gamma is the right word for this. Gamma is the "pace" at which the image lightens up between 0% and 100% white, but it doesn't tell you anything about your 0% and 100% white.

When I compared the soundmax4 with the other fabrics, I measured 100% white to calculate the gain, but I also looked what 0% white (black) was doing. I was disappointed to see that the lower gain fabrics didn't produce deeper blacks (of notice) - with the exception of the grey ALR fabrics.


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> Completely agree that the accoustic measurement was a bit rudimentary.
> Only my center is behind the screen and I didn't notice much difference in sound reproduction. Re-measured it all with audyssey and here again, I don't see that the center has to be cranked up all of a sudden. For my taste the AT isn't a problem at all, no doubt there are other people with higher demands out there
> 
> Since the ALR fabrics are dark grey on their own, they can pull down the deepest blacks, that has nothing to do with the room in my opinion. On the last picture you can see that the black sky/space is a lot darker on the ALR, but the white is also a bit less bright. That's what I mean with this fabric. The contrast of your image "shifts" a bit. I don't think gamma is the right word for this. Gamma is the "pace" at which the image lightens up between 0% and 100% white, but it doesn't tell you anything about your 0% and 100% white.
> 
> When I compared the soundmax4 with the other fabrics, I measured 100% white to calculate the gain, but I also looked what 0% white (black) was doing. I was disappointed to see that the lower gain fabrics didn't produce deeper blacks (of notice) - with the exception of the grey ALR fabrics.


As for the lower end measurement issue, my guess would be perhaps your meter not being sufficiently accurate at the lower end? What meter are you using?


----------



## Frank714

nielvm said:


> Ow okay...
> 
> Be carefull with those really high-gain fabrics. Was usefull in the days that projectors didn't have that much output, but I wouldn't use them with the recent projectors, certainly not in SDR...



Quite the contrary, especially if you are looking for more HDR peak brghtness. My screen reference is Da-Lite's High Power 2.8 and what I see on my screen (experience would more be like it) are images that rival large flat screens. The projected image is devoid of any hot spots or surface features, especially with my 3D it looks like an untainted window into another world and colors are truly vibrant and lifelike without looking exaggerated or fake. 


Should you have the opportunity to travel to Berlin (and to bring some ALR screen samples along) you are cordially invited.


----------



## nielvm

Umik microphone was used...

@Frank714: thanks for the invite, but I'm not planning anything like that soon. 
For HDR I can understand the use of a higher gain screen. Is the da-lite really 2.8, has that been measured?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Nielum,


I do not think it is fair to the commercial screen companies, (meaning only the companies of the samples you tested) and then publish the test results when your testing method is flawed. Thousands of people read these forums and many of them take the postings here as literal fact. That said, you mentioned you used a commercial screen that has a "manufactures stated gain" of 1.0 as your baseline to measure gains of other samples. So your test results are only as good as the accuracy of the so called 1.0 gain that you are using for calibration of your light measuring device. Getting accurate screen gains does require the proper lab equipment. You need a certified reflectance standard with a true gain value of 1.0 to calibrate your measuring equipment. (See attached photo) Secondary, your light source, the projector in your case, needs to be plugged into a a voltage regulator that maintains a constant voltage to the lamp. The voltage we receive from the electric power grid fluctuates up and down. Therefore, with no voltage regulator, lamp brightness output can vary quite a bit from one moment to another and can definitely flaw your test results. Anyway, I believe your intentions are all good, but I take measuring light and screens quite seriously so I am just posting an opinion here.


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## nielvm

Hi,

Thank you for your imput. 

You are absolutely right that the absolute gain values could be a bit off, I think I already acknowledged this in the review and in the answers. The meaning of this review isn't to determine the exact gain value, but rather to compare the diferent fabrics to one another. The difference between the fabrics in light reflection I posted seem to me to be quite accurate. I think the comparison or ranking of the tested fabrics are more important than the exact gain value.


----------



## Dave in Green

Like user reviews, amateur comparison testing is welcome because it contributes to the wider body of data that helps consumers form opinions and make purchase decisions. It's important to consider each piece of data in its proper perspective. For example, educated consumers tend to take individual reports with a grain of salt with the understanding that amateurs typically lack the training and resources to conduct proper scientific testing.


----------



## Skylinestar

Good to see that China screens are not left behind, yet with ultra low price.


----------



## Frank714

nielvm said:


> thanks for the invite, but I'm not planning anything like that soon.


That's alright, my invitation has no time limit, so whenever you have the chance, feel free to send me a PM. 



nielvm said:


> For HDR I can understand the use of a higher gain screen. Is the da-lite really 2.8, has that been measured?


In the particular case of the discontinued Da-Lite High Power 2.8 I have to rely on their catalogue information and the actual performance (attached).

What you get is a projected image with the clarity and brightness of a large flat screen (and without any annoying surface reflections that usually came with most flat screens ). Annoyed with the dark images of 3D front projetion (beause of the shutter glasses) I re-activated my old Da-Lite Slimline Electrol screen with the High Power 2.8 and was quite excited as the 3D images (viewed through the shutter glasses) now had the same brightness as the 2D front projected images on my gain 1.0 screen.


However, I catch myself more often than before to also watch 2D program content on my small HP 2.8 screen but wouldn't mind a larger screen image area.


The only setback is that the front projector has to be table mounted (the projection lens has to be close to eye level), but with low fan noise front projectors nowadays that's a lesser problem, IMHO, than in previous decades.


----------



## Ericglo

nielvm said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Thank you, happy to read that the review is appreciated.
> 
> My Epson is almost centered to the screen (left-right as well as up-down).
> The black crystal fabrics as shown in the pictures are hence a bit to the right and slightly upwards to the lens.
> 
> I don’t quite understand what you mean with retro-reflective? I assume light that travels through the fabric and reflects the wall behind?
> The black crystal fabrics are completely black at the back side. No light shines through…
> 
> The HG black crystal really interested me. Even though the supposed gain of 2.0 is highly exaggerated i.m.o., the fabric really deepens the blacks without significantly pulling down the absolute whites.
> The “regular” black crystal also deepens the blacks even further, but the whites suffer too much for this. I could live with the HG black crystal in my 100% light controlled room. The only downside is noticed was a bit of “sparkle” in the highest regions.
> 
> It really surprises me to see that other fabrics with a negative gain like the dreamscreen v6.0 also pull down the absolute whites (completely normal, gain


----------



## nielvm

Agreed, but you don't look into the lens to watch a movie, you look at the image at your screen.

If a lower gain screen has about the same level of blacks, the result is a less contrasty image, that's simple math 


@Frank: wow that's a huge difference!


----------



## Ericglo

nielvm said:


> Agreed, but you don't look into the lens to watch a movie, you look at the image at your screen.
> 
> If a lower gain screen has about the same level of blacks, the result is a less contrasty image, that's simple math



Yes, but now you are putting the room into the equation. Rooms are different for everyone. Those with a black pit do not need an ALR screen.


----------



## nielvm

Not really, I have a pitch black room and the difference is still visible. 
I don't need an ALR screen, but this one still improves the black perfomances, yet at the cost of the peak white.

That's the difference with the other fabrics with a tad lower gain. The peak white is also reduced, but the blacks stay more or less the same, hence a lower contrast ratio.

In other words: with all the fabrics I have compared, I can see why some would prefer the black crystal (even in a pitch black theater) and others the soundmax 4k or another with a gain around 1 or higher. 
I cannot see (and others who have visited to compare the fabrics agree) why anyone would choose the dreamscreen or the seymour UF over the other fabrics. The seymour xd is better gain-wise but has a slightly more visible structure (woven a bit looser) compared to the soundmax 4k. This all is even without taking the price into account.


----------



## Frank714

nielvm said:


> If a lower gain screen has about the same level of blacks, the result is a less contrasty image, that's simple math



From what I read and understand, it depends mostly on the kind of front projector you're using. If it's a current DLP model than a high gain screen will inevitably highlight its shortomings in terms of black levels. If it's a JVC then a high gain screen will rather highlight brightness and colors as the blacks are already rock solid at the source.


I think the current goal remains (even in a batcave) to get projected images that rival flat screens. I'm enclosing a quick comparison I made today between my High Power 2.8 (front and upper part) and my standard 1.0 gain screen. Front projector is an older Optoma HD83(00) DLP.


----------



## Dave in Green

nielvm said:


> ... Is the da-lite really 2.8, has that been measured?


Yes, measured at exactly 2.8 gain on axis by projectorcentral.com nearly 10 years ago.


----------



## Dave in Green

nielvm said:


> … That's the difference with the other fabrics with a tad lower gain. The peak white is also reduced, but the blacks stay more or less the same, hence a lower contrast ratio. ...


Am I understanding this correctly to be claiming that a passive screen material can proportionally affect the lightest colors more than the darkest colors and thus change actual -- as opposed to perceived -- screen image contrast ratio? I would be interested in understanding the scientific reasoning behind this. When in doubt on fundamental screen issues like this I always defer to @Don Stewart due to his screen engineering experience and expertise as Stewart Filmscreen's chief technical officer.


----------



## nielvm

Frank714 said:


> nielvm said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a lower gain screen has about the same level of blacks, the result is a less contrasty image, that's simple math /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what I read and understand, it depends mostly on the kind of front projector you're using. If it's a current DLP model than a high gain screen will inevitably highlight its shortomings in terms of black levels. If it's a JVC then a high gain screen will rather highlight brightness and colors as the blacks are already rock solid at the source.
> 
> 
> I think the current goal remains (even in a batcave) to get projected images that rival flat screens. I'm enclosing a quick comparison I made today between my High Power 2.8 (front and upper part) and my standard 1.0 gain screen. Front projector is an older Optoma HD83(00) DLP.
Click to expand...

I share your opinion of the jvc and dlp projectors. A jvc will propably profit less from the alr materials I tested because their Black level is already very good. With a dlp projector, these alr could improve the Black performances considerably.

Too bad the 2.8 screen is nla, would love to have tried it out.


----------



## noah katz

Frank714 said:


> The only setback is that the front projector has to be table mounted



To clarify, that's only to get the full 2.8 gain.

I get about 1.8 with a ceiling mount.





Dave in Green said:


> Am I understanding this correctly to be claiming that a passive screen material can proportionally affect the lightest colors more than the darkest colors and thus change actual -- as opposed to perceived -- screen image contrast ratio?



If you are understanding him correctly, he's mistaken.


----------



## nielvm

I don't know the science behind this, but I believe my testing methods were objectif and honest.

When I compared the soundmax 4k with the dreamscreen, I noticed that the soundmax reflected about 20-25% more light than the dreamscreen. Seems logic, dreamscreen claims a gain of 0.80.

Same test, but with a complete black pattern: the dreamscreen only shows a slightly darker image (hardly visible, only just the numbers of the measurement differed slightly) compared to the soundmax. If I adjust my manual lens of the epson tw9300 to match this slightly lower number on the soundmax 4k, the output at 100% white is still a lot higher compared to the the dreamscreen with the lens aparture in the previous setting. 

Every way I put it, the contrast ratio on my screen is higher with the soundmax 4k than it is on the dreamscreen (or the other fabrics, but less so). Off course contrast ratio isn't everything, but in my tests I could not find other reasons to prefer another fabric.

A lot of the responses in this topic have been to question testing methods and whether or not they have been scientific enough. I'm not claiming to have found the holy grail of projection screens, I only find that the xyscreen fabrics are better than other samples I have, even if you don't take the price into account. 

I would love to hear arguments why you guys would prefer dreamscreen (sorry to keep referring to this brand, but a lot of people seem to be into this on this forum) over another fabric (like seymour av/xd). I have compared them and I don't find any. I would place dreamscreen and seymour av on the same level. Seymour has a higher gain, but the fabric is woven quite loosely. Seymour xd and xyscreen soundmax 4k are comparable, with the advantage for Xyscreen.

Just my 2 cents...


----------



## Dave in Green

nielvm said:


> I don't know the science behind this, but I believe my testing methods were objectif and honest. ...


When someone posts conclusions in a forum about any subject where you do know the science and the conclusions are at odds with the science, do you believe the poster's conclusions or the science?


----------



## nielvm

Sure and I don't mind the critisism and other insights, but imo the discussion is getting a bit of target.

I'm sensing a bit of cynism that these fabrics can't be that good and that the other (much more expensive) fabrics known here are undoubtedly better. You don't hear me say that that isn't possible, but I have compared them and I can't see why they whould be better, on the contrary. I would love to hear arguments why I would be wrong about this.


----------



## Lygren

I hope it is OK that I share some of our insights on this matter as well since DreamScreen has been mentioned quite a number of times in this comparison thread, specifically the acoustical transparency in this case. I took the liberty of ordering some samples of the SoundMax 4K and compared it to the V6 using our regular measurement rig. Disclaimer; this is NOT a lab grade A/B measurement as the SoundMax 4K samples were to small to fit our rig, please see pictures. However, the fact that the SoundMax samples are not perfectly stretched up should not have any major implication on the measurement as such, and the slight overlap should neither. 

The measurements indicate that the SoundMax without any black backing applied to it, has a drop of 5,[email protected] while the V6 measures 2,[email protected] (please note that the V6 has the black backing integrated). At 10KHz, the drop is lower for both the V6 and the SoundMax though, as is always the case for acoustical waves (the larger the waves, the easier it is for them to penetrate). Every measurement was made three times or more for redundancy. The rather small measurement box does add some peaks and dips to the recording of the sweep by the way. As the dB-scale is logarithmic, a 3dB added loss is actually double the acoustical energy being blocked off. Adding a black backing would add another 1-3dB depending on the type (or 5,2dB if another layer of the same fabric as used for the SoundMax is used as backing). Also, when it comes to acoustical blockage, it increases exponentially as the overall SPL decreases, i.e. a drop of 5dB at 80dB would amount to typically 10dB at 70dB (this is just estimates, we have currently not done extensively testing on this parameter). However, if the AT is insufficient, it will potentially muffle the audio and remove micro details. This is a very important aspect for an AT fabrics as far as I am concerned at least, and although one can EQ off some of the restraints put on by using an AT fabric, you would certainly want as much as possible going through it.

Again, these values are not to be taken as "lab grade" by any means, but as an indication of what tightening the weave to the levels of what the SoundMax is at will do to the overall AT properties. Also, please note that I have attached a comparison of structural appearance of the V6, the SoundMax and a micro perf PVC screen and I will let that image speak for itself.

Also, there is certainly light bleed though the SoundMax, so measuring its gain would always have to be done using a black backing. If will see if I have the time to do some gain measurements, but I am not contending that it might have somewhat higher gain than the V6.

Please note that I have no objections on end users doing measurements, and this is not a criticism to the @nielvm at all, but I hope my inputs are helpful on better assessing the overall characteristics of the difference of these fabrics nonetheless.


----------



## nielvm

Wow, great post, thank you! I think it's great you are taking the time to compare the competition 

I can't really see which fabric is which in your graph, but I suppose the dreamscreen is the upper curve 
So the dreamscreen excells in acoustic transparancy, but has the disadvantge of a lower gain, is that a good summary?

For my case, I applied a black "backing" on the wall behind the screen which goes around the center speaker. This way I don't have the disadvantage of the double filtering... Personally I don't experience any negative influences of the fabric, once audyssey has done it's work. Since I don't hear anything above +- 16khz, the area where,there is a big difference is also limited. But, off course, this is for everyone to decide for their own...

I also acknowledge your close up pics of the fabric. Dreamscreen has the least structure and is the only one with a backing so no light shines through. For me, the gain factor was the no-go. In think that's the most important factor of a screen nowadays, besides possible visible side effects like moiré, hotspotting, etc,... Certainly with the newest evolutions of hdr...

Once again, thank you to share your insights and absolutely no critisism taken! Your accoustic measurements were a lot more professional than mine (I mostly focused on image quality) so kudos for that!


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> Wow, great post, thank you! I think it's great you are taking the time to compare the competition
> 
> I can't really see which fabric is which in your graph, but I suppose the dreamscreen is the upper curve
> So the dreamscreen excells in acoustic transparancy, but has the disadvantge of a lower gain, is that a good summary?


I guess you would need to add a very good sharpness, no possibility of moiré at any resolution, very accurate D65 tracking, and a completely non-speckled reflection to those image related pros in my HUMBLE opinion. Upping the gain by reducing the AT to such extent as on this particular fabric is not a good solution if you cherish the audio qualities of your system. Also, I have yet to analyse the sharpness and speckle characteristics of the XY-fabric, but if it does measure out to 1.0 gain like you say it might speckle somewhat as well as the PVC threads in the weave would be using a semi-blanc coating, but I´ll test it first. 

Although this particular test measured peaks at 5,2dB on 20KHz, even applying a massive amount of EQ, I have never heard any fabrics with those kind of blockage characteristics for the past 15 years of development and comparisons not sounding muffled in a regular HT environment. In a commercial cinema you can boost the SPL to such extent you´ll reduce the effect of the blockage somewhat, but this is certainly not as easy in a residential HT unless you run it at "reference" sound pressure levels most of the time...  

I´ll probably have a go at the gain as well as we´ve got a custom build calibration simulator with zero reflection made for these types of tasks, and also very good meters and a very talented THX / ISF calibrator to boot, it will certainly be interesting to see. Our reference would be the Studiotek 100 @1.0 gain. It might measure out as good as the Studiotek 100 (i.e. 1.0 gain), but I have my doubts. The V6 measures out to just over 0.8, but I´ll have it included in the mix just for the reference of it all...


----------



## Dave in Green

nielvm said:


> Sure and I don't mind the critisism and other insights, but imo the discussion is getting a bit of target.
> 
> I'm sensing a bit of cynism that these fabrics can't be that good and that the other (much more expensive) fabrics known here are undoubtedly better. You don't hear me say that that isn't possible, but I have compared them and I can't see why they whould be better, on the contrary. I would love to hear arguments why I would be wrong about this.


Don't mistake healthy skepticism for cynicism. It's not that they can't be good. It's trying to understand exactly how good they are compared with known high quality screen fabrics. It's not possible to achieve this understanding from a single user comparison evaluation. One person may perceive and analyze screen performance differently than other users or experienced screen professionals using calibrated test equipment and accepted industry testing procedures. Sometimes it comes down to the fine details to separate an average screen from a superior one.

Background story: Some time ago a forum member posted such an enthusiastic and glowing account of a DIY screen fabric that I found myself lusting after it so much that I started a separate thread to learn more about how great it was. Once other more experienced users posted the shortcomings of this fabric I realized that the enthusiasm of one amateur user had fooled me into believing it was much better than it was. I now look at such enthusiastic reviews with a dose of healthy skepticism as I believe everyone should.

Bottom line is that if a new screen fabric performs well it will be proven out over time by many reviewers and users. The first person to suggest this is naturally going to be open to question and skepticism, so nothing should be taken personally.


----------



## Ericglo

Seeing the pics of Lygren's test, I don't think I would be happy with the texture of the Soundmax. I didn't see a price on the website, but it might be an alternative for those that want a really inexpensive AT screen fabric.


----------



## nielvm

Ericglo said:


> Seeing the pics of Lygren's test, I don't think I would be happy with the texture of the Soundmax. I didn't see a price on the website, but it might be an alternative for those that want a really inexpensive AT screen fabric.


Careful, this picture is really up-close. In real-life the soundmax is one of the tightest woven structures, after the dreamweaver, a bit comparable with the seymour XD.

@Lygren: I just compared the dreamscreen to the soundmax in therms of sharpness (really up close with fine lines). I can't say I found differences. Because the soundmax is brighter it SEEMS sharper, but I think they are tied in this area.
I cannot see moiré and I always calibrate on my own screen, so I don't know if it tracks the D65 standard or not, but for me that's less important if you always calibrate on the screen you are using.
Once again: it's possible other people are more demanding, so just my opinion.
I just checked the EQ of the center: audyssey even pulls down the area between 10khz and 20khz. Is it possible that the in-room results might differ from your box?
@Dave in Green: I like the discussion and I think the posts of Lygren added a lot to this topic, especially the last one. I don't agree with all his findings (or I experience them differently in my room), but I appreciate more opinions than my own in this topic.


----------



## Ericglo

nielvm said:


> Careful, this picture is really up-close. In real-life the soundmax is one of the tightest woven structures, after the dreamweaver, a bit comparable with the seymour XD.


Sorry, I don't consider XD that great. I told Chris when he introduced Enlightor that he had revolutionized the AT screen market. It was that spectacular in my opinion. Now there is Dreamscreen V6, which is on the same level.


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> Careful, this picture is really up-close. In real-life the soundmax is one of the tightest woven structures, after the dreamweaver, a bit comparable with the seymour XD.
> 
> @Lygren: I just compared the dreamscreen to the soundmax in therms of sharpness (really up close with fine lines). I can't say I found differences. Because the soundmax is brighter it SEEMS sharper, but I think they are tied in this area.
> I cannot see moiré and I always calibrate on my own screen, so I don't know if it tracks the D65 standard or not, but for me that's less important if you always calibrate on the screen you are using.
> Once again: it's possible other people are more demanding, so just my opinion.
> I just checked the EQ of the center: audyssey even pulls down the area between 10khz and 20khz. Is it possible that the in-room results might differ from your box?


Well, first, D65 tracking is important for the parameter you are very concerned about; gain, as a shift in the fabric would have to be compensated for and as such lower the overall reflection. For example, a screen with a blue tint can measure higher gain using a light meter, but measuring the same screen after D65 correction, the gain would take a hit based on the level of D65 tracking. Most fabrics are off, but some more than others. Studiotek 100 is a reference in such regards by the way... 

As for sharpness, speckle and such, not sure if I really have the time to do a proper analysis, takes some time, but I can have a look at it, most important for you is that you´re happy with your choice of screen I guess. 

As for the AT, if you want the "quick answer", just try blowing through it. I am sure you can feel the significant resistance. Audio is air in motion... As for the box measurement, it´s not exact science, but it´s at least an almost A/B comparison, so the XY might not be 5.2dB blocked "officially", and we normally measure out the V6 to peak at about 2dB, not 2.4, and even a slight movement of the microphone might alternate the results. Measuring these kinds of parameters is very challenging and as such it would be more of a comparison than anything else. Regardless, the XYscreen certainly blocks of a whole lot more than the V6, and in my opinion, way too much. I have measured a number of woven and knitted screens up through, and I rarely see these kinds of blockage levels. Last time I believe I saw such a level of AT was for the 3. generation Screen Research which was very similar to this XY. This fabric was discontinued about ten years ago based on its poor AT performance and they released their current and still going 4K version which is rated at 1,5dB average and what we used to benchmark the V6 against on our webpages (we averaged it to 2.4dB, and the V6 to 1,5dB). 

Making out a proper screen that actually takes into account as many parameters as possible is really hard. I do realise a single layered weave that can be purchased from just about any mill is cheaper than the V6, but we custom make everything, from the layout of the weave, knit, custom dying, custom bonding, custom packaging - and also - patenting the process in doing so. End result is indeed a higher price, and I respect that you place a very high regard on gain and price, people have different priorities.


----------



## Dave in Green

It's certainly possible to prefer something that doesn't measure as accurate as something else. For example, many people have a preference for an image that pushes blue vs. D65. There's nothing wrong with that. The issue comes when someone tries to convince others that a screen that pushes blue is "better" than reference D65. While it may be for that person it certainly isn't for all those looking for the most color accurate screen.


----------



## nielvm

Concerning D65 I'm well aware that some screens push blue and this needs to be taken into account when measuring the gain. That's why I have always done a greyscale calibration on the samples prior of measuring the ftl value to calculate the gain.

I'm interested in the gain value after calibrating greysale. I don't really care if a screen pushes a certain color (most often blue) a bit or tracks D65 perfectly on its own, the little differences are calibrated away quite easily.

I will try to make some accoustic measurements of the center with and without the screen to determine how much the screen absorbs in a real-life situation.


----------



## nielvm

2 measurements of the center in my room. One at +-75db, one at +-85db. Both with and without the projection screen.

The highest difference I get with/without is about 3db.
Measurements were done without EQ.


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> 2 measurements of the center in my room. One at +-75db, one at +-85db. Both with and without the projection screen.
> 
> The highest difference I get with/without is about 3db.
> Measurements were done without EQ.


You seem to be measuring a peak drop of 5dB @20KHz as well @nielvm...


----------



## nielvm

Yes, but I don’t have supersonic ears that hear at that frequency. I believe I hear up to about 16 kHz 🙂


----------



## Lygren

...and your 13,48KHz measurement seems to be coming in at 82,7 - 79,2 = 3,5dB, right? Please also note that black backing is often required, and that even speaker drivers can reflect back from behind a non-backed screen, which would add another 1-5dB peak depending on the type of backing. Anyway, and again, if you are pleased with the fabric it´s all good, but when you previously stated there was "no significant difference" in the AT characteristics of the V6 and the SoundMax I felt I had to give the readers of this thread a second perspective. Again, please note that a 3dB difference is a doubling in acoustical energy being blocked off. 

We might be looking into using our patented tech to improve the gain somewhat at some point in the future, but for the V6 we have selected to place a balanced approach in terms of audio and video performance as it is our clear opinion both are vital.


----------



## nielvm

The sample I got from dreamscreen is only about 23 x 27 cm. It's impossible to cover a whole speaker with that. 
I'll try tomorrow to cover only the tweeter to see what type of response I measure with and without the dreamscreen.

I might have missed it, but in your graph, which line is what?

Of course you have all the right to defend your product here and I will be the first one to admit it if my readings favor dreamscreen in a way.
Please believe that I'm trying to be as objectively as I can in the matter, but of course the readers might think we are both biased for "our" screens


----------



## Lygren

nielvm said:


> The sample I got from dreamscreen is only about 23 x 27 cm. It's impossible to cover a whole speaker with that.
> I'll try tomorrow to cover only the tweeter to see what type of response I measure with and without the dreamscreen.
> 
> I might have missed it, but in your graph, which line is what?
> 
> Of course you have all the right to defend your product here and I will be the first one to admit it if my readings favor dreamscreen in a way.
> Please believe that I'm trying to be as objectively as I can in the matter, but of course the readers might think we are both biased for "our" screens


Say what; if you want a proper A/B setup to measure off of, we can arrange that if you order the largest size sample and place a note that at you have an agreement with me (lygren), you can write out any size sample size you need (...within reasonable limits), and we´ll have one shipped folded, i.e. not usable for projection, but fully usable for AT measurements. On the other hand, since your current measurements seems to correlate quite well with the ones we just took off of the box I am quite confident your results would look similar in terms of the V6 as well, but I am all for "seeing and hearing is believing", so by all means.


----------



## nielvm

Thank you for the offer. I just took some more measurements where I only covered the tweeter, which worked pretty good IMO.

The lines are without any fabric, with the dreamscreen and with soundmax. Of course all measurements are done without equalizing and mic at listening position.



The real difference begins at +- 14-15khz, the xyscreen continues to drop where the dreamscreen remains at the same level. For the rest, the both fabrics react very alike.
As you said, the difference will be slightly higher if you need to add another black backing..

To summarize: the dreamscreen performs better accoustic-wise => correct. Is it a big difference? In my opinion not so much. I don't care much what my speakers do above 15khz and if you do, I'm sure your equalizer will be able to correct for the loss. The difference will be a bit higher if you add another black backing, but you can avoid this if you darken the wall behind the projection screen and use the black fronts of your speakers to avoid reflection of the drivers. 

In return you get a significantly higher gain (will measure the exact difference later today) which you can not replace with a form of equalizing or such...
Projector manufacturers keep trying to improve their lumens, which goes at a rate of propably 5-10% per generation of 2 years. So IMO a gain which is 20% higher is a very big asset.


----------



## Dave in Green

nielvm said:


> ... I don't really care if a screen pushes a certain color (most often blue) a bit or tracks D65 perfectly on its own, the little differences are calibrated away quite easily. ...





nielvm said:


> ... I don't care much what my speakers do above 15khz and if you do, I'm sure your equalizer will be able to correct for the loss. The difference will be a bit higher if you add another black backing, but you can avoid this if you darken the wall behind the projection screen and use the black fronts of your speakers to avoid reflection of the drivers. ...


It's certainly valid that some product deficiencies can be compensated for. This is how many people justify saving money by purchasing a lower cost economy model of a product that's not as carefully engineered and produced as a more expensive premium models. For example, in North America many have cited Silver Ticket for offering a great combination of good screen performance and low price. As thewirecutter.com summed it up in naming Silver Ticket "The Best Projector Screen (for most people),":



> There are screens that are better, or cheaper, but none match the Silver Ticket in that perfect balance of better _and_ cheaper.


If XYScreen is being considered as a potential source of screens with reasonably good performance at lower cost then it would be important to understand the cost savings over screens with superior performance at higher cost. Only by fully understanding all performance parameters and exact pricing can we assign a product to its proper place on the price/performance curve.

You deserve credit for being the first to present the AVS Forum community with user impressions of this screen brand that is not well known on the global market. In time other user impressions and more sophisticated test results from experienced AV professionals will help clarify the value positioning of XYScreens compared with other screen companies.


----------



## nielvm

To give you an idea about the price: for my 120" 21:9 screen I paid around 200€ for the fabric (already had a frame). This includes the shipping (almost half the cost) and border costs.
Someone who came to check out the fabric quality has ordered a thin frame 16:9 110" screen. All costs included (customs, transport) the price will be around €600. I'm not sure if shipping to USA would cost more or less compared to Europe...
His screen should arrive tomorrow. I'm curious to see if the build quality of their frames is reasonable.

I just measured the FTL coming of the screen compared to dreamscreen, since I relied on my previous measurements with kingpin to calculate the gain.

Soundmax: 17.2 ftl
Dreamscreen: 14.2 ftl
Difference: +- 20%

Greyscale calibration was almost completely spot on between the two screens. Dreamscreen could do with one step higher on blue gain (42 vs 41).


----------



## Lygren

I guess that would make sense if the SoundMax does measure out to about 1.0 gain, and the V6 17,5% lower, i.e. about 0,83... We´ll do a test at our end, but provided that the weave is sufficiently tight, there is no secret gain is possible to increase quite a lot at the cost of AT (XD being an example). However, at 1.0 being (somewhat) AT it normally has some amount of speckle. I´ll let you know how it references to the ST100, which is a very good 1.0 gain reference as such.


----------



## Ericglo

Dave in Green said:


> If XYScreen is being considered as a potential source of screens with reasonably good performance at lower cost then it would be important to understand the cost savings over screens with superior performance at higher cost. Only by fully understanding all performance parameters and exact pricing can we assign a product to its proper place on the price/performance curve.
> 
> You deserve credit for being the first to present the AVS Forum community with user impressions of this screen brand that is not well known on the global market. In time other user impressions and more sophisticated test results from experienced AV professionals will help clarify the value positioning of XYScreens compared with other screen companies.


Great post. I agree that the OP is to be commended for taking a look at these screens. 

If the texture of the the XY is similar to Seymour XD, then it would be to much texture for me. I know plenty of people that are happy with that amount of texture and/or want the extra gain. I have said this before everyone has their own threshold of what is acceptable.


----------



## Lygren

So, we did a quick comparison measurement of the V6 vs. the SoundMax in our fully reflection treated room. We used an D65 calibrated (for Studiotek 100) JVC DLA-RS440 as the D65 light source. No further calibration was done to compensate for the slightly different D65 tracking of the two fabrics (avr CCT is 6658K on V6 and 6753K on the SoundMax). The calibrator doing the measurements is Gorm Sorensen, ISF L3 / THX certified. I´ve also included a list of the gear that we used.

What we make out of these measurements is a difference of 12,5% @Peak 100IRE. The contrast measured off of the V6 is 21057:1 and 19282:1 on the SoundMax, with no reflections to contaminate the measurements (complete batcave). The SoundMax was measured in front of a black backing to avoid contamination.

As for the SoundMax, it does also produce a bit of glare / sheen.

I guess this concludes my comments in this thread, and again; I am certainly not against end-users doing measurements / reviews at all, and I hope our inputs can be takes as just that; inputs - in which I felt was due given the comments and figures that we were not able to correspond with our own findings having developed this screen material over a long span of time.


----------



## Lygren

Sorry, here are the measurements and some pictures...


----------



## nielvm

How do you come by a difference of 12,5%?

I see Y value of 250,28 vs 219,19. To me that's 14%? Not that big a difference, but hey, we're trying to be correct 

Strange to see that you do measure quite a difference in black value (0.01 vs 0.013). That's a difference of 30%  That also explains the contrast which is a bit higher in favor of the dreamscren at your measurements...

Thanks for testing and your imput!


----------



## Lygren

It´s 12,41% actually, and we did not take into account that less correction would be needed to hit D65 with the V6. My guess for your measured contrast boost on the other fabrics would be the meter. At these light levels, the Klein K10A is very very accurate, but lower end meters such as C6 etc. have a much harder time measuring at those levels. Also, might be OK to mention that we use a PR670 (Photo Research) and / or Colorimetry Research (required for


----------



## nielvm

Haha, it depends on how you calculate of course...

You say that you loose 12.4% light coming from soundmax going to dreamscreen. I say that, according to your measurements, you gain 14% if you go from dreamscreen to soundmax...
And hey, we are both right  Don’t we love math...


----------



## nielvm

@Ericglo: for your consideration, a close up pic between soundmax (left) and seymour XD (right)


----------



## Ericglo

nielvm said:


> @Ericglo: for your consideration, a close up pic between soundmax (left) and seymour XD (right)



It is hard to tell, but it looks like the Soundmax might have slightly tighter weave.

Based on your price of the Soundmax, the prices are comparable between the two.


----------



## nielvm

Yes the soundmax has thicker threads but is woven thighter.

For me, I would have to pay shipment from usa to Europe for the Seymour, so it would have been more expensive I think...


----------



## Ericglo

I was thinking shipping to Europe might be cheaper for you, but in the US it should be cheaper with Seymour. Although, the screen material I purchased a couple of years ago wasn't expensive to ship from China.


----------



## BasR

Great discussion over here and I would like to share my opinions on both the XY Soundmax Screen and the Dreamscreen V6. 

Recently I visited Niel in Belgium and saw his Soundmax screen in action with both his Epson 9300 and my own JVC X7900 that I brought along. Together we reviewed te screen and compared it with samples of other screenfabrics. 
We also did some simple acoustical tests with my Umik mic and REW. Those acoustical transparency tests were very unscientific but I think the results were not too far off the tests that Lygren made and documented (Kudos for that!). 

At home I have a 104” AT from Screen Excellence, with the Enlightor 4K fabric. I am very happy with the quality and characteristics of that screen but I would like to move tot a slightly bigger screen, say 115”-120”. The problem is that with my current screen I have barely enough light for a decent HDR output. In didn’t care much for HDR before but that is changing rapidly as more and more good content gets available these days.

I have seen several Dreamscreen V6 screens in combination with Sony, JVC and Barco projectors. I was always pleased with the results, I really like the fabric, the image quality and the fact that the black backing is integrated. I am also convinced by it’s acoustical properties. The only downside for me is the even lower gain (0.82) than my current Enlightor 4K (0.9) screen. When I put an A3 product sample of the Dreamscreen V6 fabric over my Enlightor 4 screen, the image shows clearly darker on the Dreamscreen. The difference is at least one step up/down on the JVC manual iris. 

So, the biggest reason for me to visit Niel and his Soundmax screen was to see how much light it could reflect, if it was able to give enough pop to HDR content on a bigger screen than my own. 

My overall impression on the image of the Soundmax screen was very positive, especially when you consider the retail price. From the seating position it gave a very nice picture without any obvious downsides. Up close to the screen you can definitly see some sparkling but from my seating position I did not notice it. 

This screen however has two negatives that need carefull consideration. 

First off, when we measured the acoustical transparency we noticed some differences between de Soundmax and Dreamscreen fabric, but they seemed not too discerning at that time. If I remember correctly the Soundmax was about 1-1.5 dB less transparent at around 1k Hz and even a bit more than that above 10k Hz. But looking at the total curve that didn’t seemed a problem at all, in Niel’s room. What I didn’t realise then was that the Dreamscreen is with black backing applied and the measurement of the Soundmax was without any black backing material. So it’s fair to say that, acoustically, the Soundmax has a real disadvantage here. Niel has applied black backing around his center speaker and that works really well. Also his centerspeaker is not too insensitive and his sytem can easily compensate for the remaining loss in acoustical transparency. However, for others like myself, who need/want a conventional black backing direct behind the screen, this could be an issue. I own a rather insensitive centerspeaker (Dynaudio Contour) that needs lots of power to shine. An AT-screen + black backing that would hold it back 4-5 dB would be painfull. Buying a more expensive screen could well be cheaper than buying a more expensive poweramp to compensate for the cheaper screen... 

Second, the soundmax screenmaterial is very hard and not easy to stretch. Niel’s screen is not 100% flat. That’s only visible with the room lights on but still. For me this would not be acceptable. For Niel it’s ok and therefore not an issue. The perfectionist DIY’s among us should be aware that streching this material will be a challange. 

All things considered, this XY Soundmax screen is a nice product for a bargain price. In Niel’s home theater it fits perfecly and I fully understand that he is happy with it. 
For me, the search continues...

Bas.


----------



## nielvm

Thank you Bas for your opinion! I hope you will find your screen


----------



## nielvm

Some pics of a friend who bought a thin edge screen (110").


----------



## NiToNi

Lygren said:


> Also, when it comes to acoustical blockage, it increases exponentially as the overall SPL decreases, i.e. a drop of 5dB at 80dB would amount to typically 10dB at 70dB (this is just estimates, we have currently not done extensively testing on this parameter).


This ought to be impossible - or how do you explain this claim in terms of wave science? Seems to me this would indicate something is off with your measurement technique or equipment rather.


----------



## Lygren

NiToNi said:


> This ought to be impossible - or how do you explain this claim in terms of wave science? Seems to me this would indicate something is off with your measurement technique or equipment rather.


For now, we have only measured this effect, and it is significant and repeatable. Might be the gear and/or setup caused by added reflections within our cabinet, which in term increases as the SPL increases and as such influences the measurements to provide the effect we are observing, but the cabinet is properly insulated so it should not be influenced by that factor in a too great extent. That might be a relevant factor also for actual cinema installations, but I have not conducted a sufficient amount of tests to provide you with any further help as to explain this observation. 

As for the actual perceived difference between 4-5dB and a 2-3dB peak blockage, it is certainly extremely significant in my experience and opinion, but audio is highly subjective and also it depends on the type of speaker, overall SPL etc. Some is possible to EQ off, but will cause increased reflections being built up behind the screen and as such introduce more issues than just EQ artefacts alone.


----------



## NiToNi

Lygren said:


> As for the actual perceived difference between 4-5dB and a 2-3dB peak blockage, it is certainly extremely significant in my experience and opinion, but audio is highly subjective and also it depends on the type of speaker, overall SPL etc.



Perceived difference is explained by Fletcher-Munson but an objectively measured difference is not (unless you are inadvertently using a weighted response curve as your mic cal file). The ratio of direct vs reflected energy inside your measurement box is also independent of SPL. There is no scientific support for a phenomena of a greater roll-off in the 10-20kHz range due to a variation in amplitude (volume). The wavelength of the relevant audio remains the same.


----------



## Lygren

NiToNi said:


> Perceived difference is explained by Fletcher-Munson but an objectively measured difference is not (unless you are inadvertently using a weighted response curve as your mic cal file). The ratio of direct vs reflected energy inside your measurement box is also independent of SPL. There is no scientific support for a phenomena of a greater roll-off in the 10-20kHz range due to a variation in amplitude (volume). The wavelength of the relevant audio remains the same.




Thanks, I am sure your theory is accurate, which in term is a good thing for AT screens in general as you’re saying the average measured at 70 or 80dB, albeit being recorded differently in our setup still remains the same in reality. So, a blockage of 3dB remains at 3dB even if the amplitude of the wave is reduced and taken into account the dB scale is logarhitmic - according to theory at least... 

Measuring audio blockage is certainly quite challenging (as is video...), but at least we’re doing an a/b measurement for our indications and will try to improve our methodology at some point as well, as it remains very important to us to be able to properly document the very good AT characteristics of the hybrid construction used in our case... 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NiToNi

Yes it is a challenge indeed. Striving to produce as acoustically transparent a screen as possible though is a noble quest and I applaud your for your hard work in this respect.


Here's hoping your future v7 turns out to be a sparkle-and-sheen free 2.8 gain, +8K compatible, [email protected], wallet-friendly model


----------



## nielvm

Got “some” more samples today, including some high-gain ones which might interesting.

Will test, measure and report later 😉


----------



## bdht

In regard to the Black Crystal 0.8, would the darker whites be corrected by more lamp output, gamma correction, or white balance?


----------



## Maestrosc

Really enjoyed the review.

Am looking for/considering an AT screen for a new hometheater build.

Wasnt a huge fan of people stepping in to say that it "isnt fair for hobbyist to write reviews of products" its kind of the entire point of this forum. But I wont derail this thread.

Was curious if you compared this to something like a spandex screen with black backing and had any input on the difference in terms of visual performance?

I am looking to make the move to 4k, and while everyone raves about the price/performance of spandex, I want to make sure I will actually be able to make use of my 4k projection system, and not be thwarted at the final step by a cheap screen.

Getting honest reviews and opinions of products on this particular subject can be kind of a pain, because more and more companies are spending time on here and whenever a competitor or a cheaper alternative gets a positive review, they all jump out to try to defend their products and more importantly their price-points. This happens moreso in the screen section, than any other section on AVSforum imo.


----------



## nielvm

Regarding the blacklevels on the black crystal, I recently did a more thorough research of the influence of the gain values on 0IRE (black) and 100IRE (white).
In general, the contrast ratio between the two remain more or less the same between all the fabrics. So a lower gain means lower blacks, but less bright whites. 
You cannot raise the white levels again by adjusting gamma or white balance.

So the black crystal is interesting if you need the ALR capacities or when you have a lot of light output/a smaller screen to lower the black levels. I can imagine it would also be a nice combination with a dlp projector, which always lack a bit in that department.

Regarding the comparison between spandex, before my soundmax 4k screen, I had a DIY spandex screen. Spandex is super cheap and pretty good, but has a very low gain of about 0.75. Also, the color uniformity is a lot worse (spandex pushes blue a lot). When you calibrate on your own screen, this is of course easily corrected. 

On a 2.8m (+- 9ft) wide screen 0.75 gain is pretty low, certainly with HDR. If I would use the same projector (Epson Tw9300/UB5040) on a smaller screen of let’s say 2m (+- 6ft), a lower gain could be more interesting. 

I got some more samples from xyscreen, a lot of HG fabrics. I haven’t yet had the time to translate my review in English about them. The highest gain I measured was about 1.55 and I couldn’t see any sparkles or hotspotting, but I must admit it’s often quite hard to review on a small piece of fabric.

Today I should also get samples from the German company Hivilux. I’m creating a large word file to post my findings for every screen/brand.


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> Regarding the blacklevels on the black crystal, I recently did a more thorough research of the influence of the gain values on 0IRE (black) and 100IRE (white).
> In general, the contrast ratio between the two remain more or less the same between all the fabrics. So a lower gain means lower blacks, but less bright whites.
> You cannot raise the white levels again by adjusting gamma or white balance.
> 
> So the black crystal is interesting if you need the ALR capacities or when you have a lot of light output/a smaller screen to lower the black levels. I can imagine it would also be a nice combination with a dlp projector, which always lack a bit in that department.


And how about increasing lamp output 20%? Does that bring the white back up?

In the case of helping DLP black floor I dont think thats the case, my white screen can get significantly closer to black then my benq w1070. E.g. putting an all black image on the w1070 and casting a shadow on the screen the shadow is almost as dark as the masking whereas the projected area is much brighter.


----------



## nielvm

Increasing the lamp: yes, but your Black levels will rise too.

Don’t quite understand what you are saying with the white screen. An unprojected screen will be darker, but I always measured the black performance of the projected image of course...


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> Increasing the lamp: yes, but your Black levels will rise too.
> 
> Don’t quite understand what you are saying with the white screen. An unprojected screen will be darker, but I always measured the black performance of the projected image of course...



Yup, nevermind, I pulled out a Parallax .8 sample and when the image is all black with the lights out the parallax is much darker then the 1.0 gain white screen.


----------



## Ericglo

Maestrosc said:


> Really enjoyed the review.
> 
> Am looking for/considering an AT screen for a new hometheater build.
> 
> Wasnt a huge fan of people stepping in to say that it "isnt fair for hobbyist to write reviews of products" its kind of the entire point of this forum. But I wont derail this thread.
> 
> Was curious if you compared this to something like a spandex screen with black backing and had any input on the difference in terms of visual performance?
> 
> I am looking to make the move to 4k, and while everyone raves about the price/performance of spandex, I want to make sure I will actually be able to make use of my 4k projection system, and not be thwarted at the final step by a cheap screen.
> 
> Getting honest reviews and opinions of products on this particular subject can be kind of a pain, because more and more companies are spending time on here and whenever a competitor or a cheaper alternative gets a positive review, they all jump out to try to defend their products and more importantly their price-points. This happens moreso in the screen section, than any other section on AVSforum imo.


Where have you been? Companies have been on AVS from the beginning. The input can be invaluable. In this instance, I don't believe Lygren was being combative or dismissive. He actually went to the trouble of testing the material himself. He gave another data point that you can either acknowledge or dismiss.


----------



## Dave in Green

It's natural to have healthy skepticism about any new product without a track record that suddenly starts getting positive reviews from new forum members. Of course many of those reviews are honest opinions from legitimate enthusiasts. But it's well known that some have used this and other forums to shill for various products that haven't been evaluated by trusted independent reviewers with a history of accurate, unbiased testing.

Certainly no one on AVS Forum should be discouraged from expressing their opinions, whether those opinions are positive reviews of a new product or healthy skepticism about those reviews until such time as more definitive proof of performance is available from multiple reliable sources.


----------



## Endream

nielvm said:


> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your imput.
> 
> You are absolutely right that the absolute gain values could be a bit off, I think I already acknowledged this in the review and in the answers. The meaning of this review isn't to determine the exact gain value, but rather to compare the diferent fabrics to one another. The difference between the fabrics in light reflection I posted seem to me to be quite accurate. I think the comparison or ranking of the tested fabrics are more important than the exact gain value.


nielvm, do you use the black spandex fabric behind the soundmax 4k or just the soundmax 4k fabric alone?


----------



## nielvm

I used the Black spandex as well, but I placed it against the wall so it could go around my center speaker, not covering that up twice.

You really need a Black backing (or Black wall) with this cloth.


----------



## Endream

nielvm said:


> I used the Black spandex as well, but I placed it against the wall so it could go around my center speaker, not covering that up twice.
> 
> You really need a Black backing (or Black wall) with this cloth.


Thank you!
Think iam gonna jump on it for my future room in my new house, was into the V6 before i bumpt into your review


----------



## nielvm

Wow even cheaper! I don't think you will regret it


----------



## nielvm

It really is, but beware, the soundmax is quite hard to get 100% straight in diy.


----------



## Endream

nielvm said:


> Wow even cheaper! I don't think you will regret it


Btw can you tell me anything more about the soundmax against the more expensive V6?
Got a sample from v6 at home and no cons on the soundmax side?, for example the v6 has a black fabric on the back.
Got any pictures of your own room?, my future room will be 7mX3.8m dedicated.
Also bumped into threads about micro perf screens, but have not seen them live so feel free to give me some inputs.
Sceptical to the holes in it to start with and some people speaking about some weird effects.


----------



## nielvm

Well enough has been said about soundmax vs dreamscreen in this forum.

To summarize: dreamscreen performs better accoustic-wise, but in MY opinion that is neglectable. The biggest differences start at 16khz.
It also has a Black backing, with soundmax you need to provide one yourself (or ask xyscreen, I thought they could do that too).
Image-wise soundmax is the real winner for me due to the higher gain.

Wouldn’t recommend perfed screens either, I had moiré like effects on some resolutions.

Look for my posts in the Epson ub5040 topic for HDR screenshots.


----------



## bdht

I purchased a 92" tensioned motorized screen from xy with their Black Crystal .8 material. Very happy with the screen so far. Great ambient light rejection, a nice smooth flat surface, no roller lines or blemishes, motor is quiet and average speed. Material has good detail, although it's textureless there is a bit of sheen sparkle due to the gain layer but nothing overly distracting especially for the price. Viewing angles seem good(advertised as 80° half gain) hard to tell with my w1070 which has poor light uniformity. I didnt notice any large color shift, whites are still bright and vibrant(obviously not as much on a 1.1 white screen or a da lite hi power ;] but all things relative it looks great. Shadow details maintained with a gamma/brightness adjustment. For the w1070 blacks are much deeper which is a huge plus, much increased perceived contrast. Very nice screen for $600 shipped. Shipping was 5-6 days from China after production which was a few days as well, they're made to order.


----------



## nielvm

Great that you like your screen and thank you for your reply.

From the samples I have I like the HG Black crystal over the regular one, but unfortunately that one isn’t available in tab tention.

Black crystal and dlp projectors are a great match imo, as you said it is a nice way to improve the lesser Black level of a dlp projector.

Have fun with the screen!


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> Great that you like your screen and thank you for your reply.
> 
> From the samples I have I like the HG Black crystal over the regular one, but unfortunately that one isn’t available in tab tention.
> 
> Black crystal and dlp projectors are a great match imo, as you said it is a nice way to improve the lesser Black level of a dlp projector.
> 
> Have fun with the screen!


The high gain would've been an intense amount of light for me too, I still need a nd2 filter for lights out viewing with the .8 material and the w1070. It's true what they say about things being relative, when I held the Black Crystal sample over my white 1.1 gain screen whites were much darker in comparison, but when just viewing the black crystal as a whole you don't notice at all. 

This material really is a great option for people with white/ light colored rooms or want lights on, I was looking at all sorts of materials from elites cinegrey5d to dalite parallax. You still need to make some effort to have the lighting not shine directly on the screen, but compared to a white screen the difference is astounding. In no instance could I ever watch any content with 2 500lumen lamps on in the room with the white screen, now animation and high apl material is bright detailed and colorful, and I'm going to try to adjust some things in the room to improve low apl material, i.e. better lamp placement behind the screen etc., which is still much more watchable than before.


----------



## nielvm

I think it's very smart to take the black crystal with a dlp projector and a 92" screen.

With a much larger screen, the HG version is really necessary imo. For example 120" with black crystal would become too dark I think. Your projector has enough lumens to light up the 92" screen, whilst having the benefit of the greatly improved blacks.

This is exactly what I wrote in my fuller review of different fabrics (still to be translated in English). The black crystal is a great ALR screen for smaller screens and perfect in combination with dlp projectors. Last week I had a friend over with a dlp projector. Of all the fabrics I had laying around from different manufacturers the (HG) black crystal seemed the best combo.


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> The black crystal is a great ALR screen for smaller screens and perfect in combination with dlp projectors.


It's suprising really, to be such a dark grey and a decent gain with minimal artifacting and maintaining good viewing angles all at the lowest prices in the market.


----------



## Endream

nielvm said:


> It really is, but beware, the soundmax is quite hard to get 100% straight in diy.


Oh i see, how did you solve that matter? =)


----------



## tatumjon

Endream said:


> Oh i see, how did you solve that matter? =)



I asked them about this as well and their reply was to purchase a screen kit. I'm not 100% sure how that solves the problem. It comes disassembled and while assembly looks pretty easy won't I still have the issue of trying to get it "straight" which I believe is code for wrinkle free.


----------



## nielvm

Well to be honest, I haven't yet.

In my setup, I've got 3 spots directly above the screen which emphasise the "waves" enormously. When I put the screen in place, everything seemed as smooth as a biliart ball, untill the last 10 cm, when it came into the direct light of the spots.
It isn't a hughe problem because it's really impossible to see any "wrinkels" when projecting, not even with a 100% white pattern or sharpness pattern, but when the lights are on, it is visible.
Look in the epson ub5040 thread for some screenshots.

A friend of mine bought a whole screen and also has spot directly above his screen. His screen is 100% smooth. The screen is thightened up with springs and thus remaining straight. I stapeled the cloth on a wooden frame. With miliskin this was quite easy because that has a lot of stretch, with the soundmax it isn't


----------



## nielvm

tatumjon said:


> I asked them about this as well and their reply was to purchase a screen kit. I'm not 100% sure how that solves the problem. It comes disassembled and while assembly looks pretty easy won't I still have the issue of trying to get it "straight" which I believe is code for wrinkle free.


Because I didn't know the brand and therefore cautious, I only bought the cloth. Because shipment and customs are a big part of the total cost, a whole screen doesn't cost a great deal more than the cloth alone. I should've bought the whole screen.

Apparentlu they are developing an adjustable AR screen atm. There's a big chance I will go for that once it's released.


----------



## tatumjon

nielvm said:


> Well to be honest, I haven't yet.
> 
> In my setup, I've got 3 spots directly above the screen which emphasise the "waves" enormously. When I put the screen in place, everything seemed as smooth as a biliart ball, untill the last 10 cm, when it came into the direct light of the spots.
> It isn't a hughe problem because it's really impossible to see any "wrinkels" when projecting, not even with a 100% white pattern or sharpness pattern, but when the lights are on, it is visible.
> Look in the epson ub5040 thread for some screenshots.
> 
> A friend of mine bought a whole screen and also has spot directly above his screen. His screen is 100% smooth. The screen is thightened up with springs and thus remaining straight. I stapeled the cloth on a wooden frame. With miliskin this was quite easy because that has a lot of stretch, with the soundmax it isn't



OK, looking back through my emails, I did find a long file they sent me that included pictures of the assembly and you can clearly see the many springs in the system to get it wrinkle free. I've requested a sample of the Soundmax 4K. Of course, I requested that sample two days ago and the only thing I received was an invoice for the entire screen so we'll see.


----------



## nielvm

I don't know if they will send you samples for free and shipping costs might push you to buy the whole screen


----------



## tatumjon

It can't possible be that much. I order stuff from China all the time on alibaba which typically ships very inexpensively. They could roll it up and ship it in a small padded envelope. I've ordered three buffers (all under $150) and a Zidoo Z10 ($289) in the last month. All shipped for free and all arrived within a week to the west coast USA. We don't have any customs or duty or VAT or anything of that nature.


----------



## nielvm

You're propably right, although I don't really know how it goes. Often shipment from China is cheaper than a package coming from your neighbour (sort of speak). 
Perhaps one manufacturer has to pay higher fees than alibaba or other big companies.


----------



## tatumjon

I do hope they send me a sample. I already have a 120" screen made with Seymour Center Stage XD so there's no way I'm spending any money on something that may or may not even be an upgrade.


----------



## nielvm

I also have a xd sample.
The weave of the soundmax is a lot thighter, but gain-wise there is not that big a difference.
I find the soundmax the better of the two, but I’m not sure if I would “upgrade” if I already had the xd...


----------



## tatumjon

Well that's helpful. Thanks.


----------



## MJ DOOM

nielvm said:


> Apparentlu they are developing an adjustable AR screen atm. There's a big chance I will go for that once it's released.


They give any timeline on this? I have a thin frame Black Crystal screen sitting new in a box right now in my basement, it might end up for sale if this new screen is any anything like old Monoprice Dual format screens. 😁


----------



## nielvm

No I don’t know anything about timing...


----------



## tatumjon

Experiment over. $50 shipping for a sample. Pass.


----------



## bdht

tatumjon said:


> Experiment over. $50 shipping for a sample. Pass.


I was quoted $25ish usd. It's fast shipping, 2-3 days from China. Maybe you could request free shipping but it might take 2 months.


----------



## tatumjon

bdht said:


> I was quoted $25ish usd. It's fast shipping, 2-3 days from China. Maybe you could request free shipping but it might take 2 months.



I'm going to guess that there's no way in God's green earth that you live closer to China in the US than I do (unless you live in Alaska or Hawaii), so I'm not sure how I got that quote. I'm just one of those guys. I'm the guy that never gets the deal. LOL


Like I said, I order from Alibaba all the time so I know what shipping from China entails, how fast it is, etc.


----------



## nielvm

Too bad shipping is too expensive, even for samples. 
You could work something out that one person orders a lot of samples and ships them through, but that'll become too complicated I guess...

As I said, I think alibaba can send that cheap because they send so much. Don't think that one company like xyscreen can benefit from such low rates, but I'm not sure how that works. It's not that they are too stingy to provide samples. They are the only company who send samples large enough to really evaluate. All other companies give an A4 format that isn't easy to evaluate.


----------



## sony-pany

Hello, friends as I am considering XYSCREEN Sound Max4K Woven Acoustic Transparent Screen with the frame and black backing. I was looking at this size 135 inches (3155x1342mm) 2.35:1.
Other Screens that I am considering:
Screenacoustics V6 and Elunevision Audioweave 4K.

I have few concerns about XYSCREEN Sound Max4K Acoustic Transparency (Speaker Sound Quality)
Viewing distance is 1st row is 8 to 9 feet. I need some advice.

Below is my Setup:
Room Dimensions: LxWxH: 
L: 20.6' X W: 10.3'(*10.8' with offset ) X H: 8
(Total 1800 Cubic feet of space )

Projector: Epson 5040ub
Receiver: Denon AVR-X8500H 
Triad Speaker
Triad In-Wall Silver/4 (3, LCR ) 
Triad In-Ceiling Silver/6 Sat (4, overhead)
Triad In-Wall Bronze/4 Surround ((6, side & rear surrounds) 
Subwoofers: PSA S1510 (Dual)
Screen: Aspect ratio of 2.35 AT Size around 120'' undecided and researching!
Seating: 3 Rows Total. 1st Row of Low Profile Ikea sofa and 2 Rows of Seatcraft Serenity Tiered Seating


----------



## nielvm

What exactly is your question?

Personally I think your screen size is very big compared to your viewing distance, no mather what fabric you would choose.

You won’t see the fabric texture at that distance though...


----------



## bdht

Using this pattern http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gamma_calibration.php, with the Black Crystal .8, gamma seems to track to about 1.6 with a W1070 set to 2.2. If I set the W1070 to 2.6 then it'll track to about 1.8. Does that sound right? I'm 99% with my white screen it was at about 2.2 when set to 2.2 but it's been a while since I looked at that.


----------



## sony-pany

nielvm said:


> What exactly is your question?
> 
> Personally, I think your screen size is very big compared to your viewing distance, no matter what fabric you would choose.
> 
> You won’t see the fabric texture at that distance though...


My question is 
Do you or anyone here have any Ide about Xyscreen's frame quality they offer 80mm and 12mm (like borderless)
Your thought on XYSCREEN Sound Max4K Acoustic Transparent material
I am worried about sound Transparency (Speaker Sound Quality being behind the screen and black back fabric ) Compared to Screenacoustics V6, Elunevision Audioweave 4K or Elit Screens AcousticPro 1080P3

I will appreciate your feedback.


----------



## nielvm

I know someone who ordered a screen (with) frame and is really happy about it. I can't speak for myself, I haven't seen it yet.

For sound transparancy the soundmax is propably the "worst" fabric. PERSONALLY I find the differences in sound transparancy neglectible though. In MY opinion the sound loss is easily corrected with eq, the biggest differences are above 16khz, so that for me that is only nearly noticable. On the other hand, you get a noticable higher gain screen with an extremely tight weave, so for me it is the absolute winner for image quality.

Just my 2 cents


----------



## david8613

years ago I remember having a 106" high power screen with a cheap incfocus projector and that combo threw such a nice picture. of the xyscreens which of the acoustic models comes kind of close to the picture quality of the awesome high power screen?


----------



## nielvm

The soundmax 5 has the highest gain at about 1.2...


----------



## wpbpete

@nielvm I just received a quote for a frame and material from Xyscreen and yea it's a great price. However, I forgot to ask the about the backing. I believe you mentioned you have black spandex behind yours, how is that working out for you? How did you install it?


----------



## nielvm

I have a Black spandex on the wall behind my screen and around my center speaker. As long as the wall behind the screen is dark, you’re fine...


----------



## nielvm

bdht said:


> Using this pattern http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gamma_calibration.php, with the Black Crystal .8, gamma seems to track to about 1.6 with a W1070 set to 2.2. If I set the W1070 to 2.6 then it'll track to about 1.8. Does that sound right? I'm 99% with my white screen it was at about 2.2 when set to 2.2 but it's been a while since I looked at that.




I’ve never seen that test and I really don’t see what I should see...

I don’t think the screen can change the gamma much, and if it would i’d think the Black crystal would raise the gamma rather than to lower it.


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> I’ve never seen that test and I really don’t see what I should see...
> 
> I don’t think the screen can change the gamma much, and if it would i’d think the Black crystal would raise the gain, rather than to lower it.


If you look at the solid bars the tops are dark and the bottoms are bright, the transition area is where the gamma tracks, it should be around 2.2.


----------



## tommarra

Got my 130 inch Soundmax4 AT screen today .. shipped from China and delivered today. 

Fedex was its usual not too efficient self and my package was stuck in Japan for over a week - no fault of Lee from XYscreen, just Fedex being Fedex.


The screen was a breeze to setup. A few screws and about 30 springs to stretch the screen.

The screen material itself is quite stiff and the weave is very tight. My initial impression is as follow:

Video: Great video quality. My seat is ~9 ft from the screen and there are no artifacts whatsoever. I watched a few scenes from Interstellar, Bladerunner 2049, Avengers, Planet Earth ... and everything was displayed with fantastic details and colors. 

Audio: There is some attenuation in the higher frequency - enough that I can make out that I need to run ARC on my MRX720 again. Also I tested it late in the night when I could not really crank up the volume. As of now I believe that with light EQ audio performance will be close to the original.


Question for owners of AT screen: If my wall behind the screen is all triple black velvet, do I still need to attach the black backing, or can I get away with not applying it. My hunch is that the black backing will cause further attenuation of the highs. Thoughts?


----------



## Wookii

I tried to contact them to get a sample of Soundmax 4K, as I'm always on the lookout for new good quality AT materials - they wanted *$50* just to ship a small sample in an envelope?! 

Forget that, I don't think I've ever been charged for samples before wherever they've been sent from around the world. It's a great anti-sales policy!


----------



## Craig Peer

Wookii said:


> I tried to contact them to get a sample of Soundmax 4K, as I'm always on the lookout for new good quality AT materials - they wanted *$50* just to ship a small sample in an envelope?!
> 
> Forget that, I don't think I've ever been charged for samples before wherever they've been sent from around the world. It's a great anti-sales policy!


That's quite a bit for postage !


----------



## Cremer Lee

Wookii said:


> I tried to contact them to get a sample of Soundmax 4K, as I'm always on the lookout for new good quality AT materials - they wanted *$50* just to ship a small sample in an envelope?!
> 
> Forget that, I don't think I've ever been charged for samples before wherever they've been sent from around the world. It's a great anti-sales policy!


Hi , could you please let me know who you contacted with? Thanks


----------



## tommarra

Craig Peer said:


> That's quite a bit for postage !




Yes seems high. 

But when I worked with Lee from XY he was great. If you work with him maybe he can help out. It shouldn’t cost so much to send a piece of cloth. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## armyplace

tommarra said:


> Got my 130 inch Soundmax4 AT screen today .. shipped from China and delivered today.
> 
> Fedex was its usual not too efficient self and my package was stuck in Japan for over a week - no fault of Lee from XYscreen, just Fedex being Fedex.
> 
> 
> The screen was a breeze to setup. A few screws and about 30 springs to stretch the screen.
> 
> The screen material itself is quite stiff and the weave is very tight. My initial impression is as follow:
> 
> Video: Great video quality. My seat is ~9 ft from the screen and there are no artifacts whatsoever. I watched a few scenes from Interstellar, Bladerunner 2049, Avengers, Planet Earth ... and everything was displayed with fantastic details and colors.
> 
> Audio: There is some attenuation in the higher frequency - enough that I can make out that I need to run ARC on my MRX720 again. Also I tested it late in the night when I could not really crank up the volume. As of now I believe that with light EQ audio performance will be close to the original.
> 
> 
> Question for owners of AT screen: If my wall behind the screen is all triple black velvet, do I still need to attach the black backing, or can I get away with not applying it. My hunch is that the black backing will cause further attenuation of the highs. Thoughts?


I emailed them yesterday for a quote for 130" soundmax 4k with 80mm frame. They said because of the length they had to cut it in half so that it could be shipped. Was that the case for your screen? I was just a bit worried about the join and whether it was noticeable at typical viewing distance since the frame was velvet wrapped.

Also was there much EQ required for the AT screen? That was my only concern as it seemed to be higher loss compared to other screens (dreamscreen v6/seymourAV).


----------



## tommarra

armyplace said:


> I emailed them yesterday for a quote for 130" soundmax 4k with 80mm frame. They said because of the length they had to cut it in half so that it could be shipped. Was that the case for your screen? I was just a bit worried about the join and whether it was noticeable at typical viewing distance since the frame was velvet wrapped.
> 
> Also was there much EQ required for the AT screen? That was my only concern as it seemed to be higher loss compared to other screens (dreamscreen v6/seymourAV).


The cut is not at all noticeable. It is a very thin but sturdy frame. Took me about 30 minutes to assemble. Its all covered in black velvet so not at all visible .There are a few youtube videos that you can see how it is all assmbled and how it looks.

The screen came with backing material, but the adhesive on the velcro was not very good - and it keeps coming off. So I just went to Homedepot and got good quality two way tape to put the black backing. Also I made the black backing go over the speakers, so that there is nothing between the speaker and the acoustic fabric. The black fabric covers the backside of the speakers.

I also have black velvet on the rear wall - so that helps as well.


For EQ - I just ticked up the treble on my system by 2dB, thats about it. If you read previous posts you will see that difference between SoundMax and V6 is about 2-3dB higher attenuation in the 10k+ range. On my B&Ws which have, shall I say lively highs, the difference is not really visible.

I think its a fantastic screen for the price - very easy to assemble, great picture quality etc.


----------



## armyplace

tommarra said:


> The cut is not at all noticeable. It is a very thin but sturdy frame. Took me about 30 minutes to assemble. Its all covered in black velvet so not at all visible .There are a few youtube videos that you can see how it is all assmbled and how it looks.
> 
> The screen came with backing material, but the adhesive on the velcro was not very good - and it keeps coming off. So I just went to Homedepot and got good quality two way tape to put the black backing. Also I made the black backing go over the speakers, so that there is nothing between the speaker and the acoustic fabric. The black fabric covers the backside of the speakers.
> 
> I also have black velvet on the rear wall - so that helps as well.
> 
> 
> For EQ - I just ticked up the treble on my system by 2dB, thats about it. If you read previous posts you will see that difference between SoundMax and V6 is about 2-3dB higher attenuation in the 10k+ range. On my B&Ws which have, shall I say lively highs, the difference is not really visible.
> 
> I think its a fantastic screen for the price - very easy to assemble, great picture quality etc.


Thanks @tommarra,

That's fantastic to hear. I did check out some of their youtube videos as I plan to get a 16:9 screen. Whilst looking I was thinking about masking solution and it just so happens they've released a new product that seems to work quite well.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

how much time does the shipping take for XY fabric ? Also how does it compare to XD (looks very similar) ?


----------



## tommarra

nanoodhaliwal said:


> how much time does the shipping take for XY fabric ? Also how does it compare to XD (looks very similar) ?


About ten days, but its all dependent on Fedex. My package was stuck in Japan due to the Chinese New Year - but for now it should be fast. They ship it really fast though - Fedex is more often than not the culprit.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

tommarra said:


> About ten days, but its all dependent on Fedex. My package was stuck in Japan due to the Chinese New Year - but for now it should be fast. They ship it really fast though - Fedex is more often than not the culprit.


Thanks for your reply Tom . Do you have to put any backing black cloth behind it ?


----------



## tommarra

nanoodhaliwal said:


> Thanks for your reply Tom . Do you have to put any backing black cloth behind it ?


If you ask Lee he can send the backing with the cloth.

I have black velvet on the wall as well as the backing, but I put my backing so that they go over the speakers so that there is nothing between my speakers and the AT screen fabric.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

tommarra said:


> If you ask Lee he can send the backing with the cloth.
> 
> I have black velvet on the wall as well as the backing, but I put my backing so that they go over the speakers so that there is nothing between my speakers and the AT screen fabric.


 @Cremer Lee , is this the username?

I have black paint on the wall so I will try without any black cloth, maybe later add DB valvet or spandex. Anyone compared it to XD ? Is XD fabric same price ?


----------



## nielvm

I have tested both and I prefer the xyscreen soundmax.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

nielvm said:


> I have tested both and I prefer the xyscreen soundmax.


Thanks for you recommendation, any comparison pics ? I did not see them in you first post. Also how much would the 120" screen fabric cost?


----------



## nielvm

For pricing: contact both manufacturers .

The xd is propably slightly better accoustic-wise because the the weave is less dense. For me this difference is neglectible. On the other hand, the soundmax has a danser weave and if I remember correctly a higher gain.

So in general the soundmax won for me for the picture quality.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

nielvm said:


> For pricing: contact both manufacturers .
> 
> The xd is propably slightly better accoustic-wise because the the weave is less dense. For me this difference is neglectible. On the other hand, the soundmax has a danser weave and if I remember correctly a higher gain.
> 
> So in general the soundmax won for me for the picture quality.


Thanks Nielvm 

How do you make payments to them? I sent inquiry on their website and got reply back. Someone contacted me and asked to paypal them and I get the screen tomorrow ?

Sounds right ?


----------



## nielvm

Shipment takes longer, but payment sounds right.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

nielvm said:


> Shipment takes longer, but payment sounds right.


Thanks  Waiting for the screen now.


----------



## n84china

nanoodhaliwal said:


> Thanks  Waiting for the screen now.



Has anyone else received their screens? Looking for more impressions/perspectives, especially on new-ish products.


----------



## nanoodhaliwal

n84china said:


> Has anyone else received their screens? Looking for more impressions/perspectives, especially on new-ish products.


I received the screen, but unfortunately it is still sitting in the package. I will share impression once I am able to install it.


----------



## Morphx2

Hi everyone,

Which 120 inch alr screen should I get for a Benq tk800 at around 15 feet? The dark crystal or the HG? It will be in the family room with ambient light. They quoted around 625ish with a frame shipped to me. How do they get such a high viewing angle, around 160, while other companies are such lower?


----------



## nielvm

Hi,

Sorry for the late reply.

I found the HG black crystal a hughe improvement over the regular one. If possible I would always choose this one.

In therms of viewing angles I don't really know if they are always accurate (as the given gain value). In general: the smaller the viewing angle, the higher the ambient light rejection capacities.

The smaller the viewing angle, the higher the difference between the middle of the screen and the sides (light reflection speaking). I have a sample of a 90° type fabric, the measured ftl in the middle of the screen and the sides is not funny


----------



## bdht

nielvm said:


> I found the HG black crystal a hughe improvement over the regular one. If possible I would always choose this one.


I have the .8 gain black crystal and in my situation the high gain would be too bright. Currently sitting about 9' from a 92" screen, with a w1070, using a nd2 filter and smart eco is a good amount of light for sdr. For 3d and hdr, however, I think the high gain would be beneficial. 

The viewing angles on the .8gain are very good, but the 2.0gain has a 45° half gain doesn't it?

Also the high gain is much more sparkly than the .8 correct? The .8 is just barely acceptable with the artifacts, but I think you need to go up to the si slate, dalite parallax, epv darkstar9 etc for an artifactless alr screen.


----------



## kawiguy998

Just wanted to give a shout out to @nielvm for all the info regarding xy screens offerings. I placed an order today for a 138” diagonal screen with the newest soundmax 8K material. Cremer Lee was awesome to work with and sent many photos for me to use in my decision process. Screen is slated to ship on the 8th.


----------



## nielvm

bdht said:


> I have the .8 gain black crystal and in my situation the high gain would be too bright. Currently sitting about 9' from a 92" screen, with a w1070, using a nd2 filter and smart eco is a good amount of light for sdr. For 3d and hdr, however, I think the high gain would be beneficial.
> 
> 
> 
> The viewing angles on the .8gain are very good, but the 2.0gain has a 45° half gain doesn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> Also the high gain is much more sparkly than the .8 correct? The .8 is just barely acceptable with the artifacts, but I think you need to go up to the si slate, dalite parallax, epv darkstar9 etc for an artifactless alr screen.




The Hg has a few sparkles with highly luminant scenes, but for me it was acceptable. You get a whole lot of extra gain compared to the regular one.


----------



## nielvm

kawiguy998 said:


> Just wanted to give a shout out to @nielvm for all the info regarding xy screens offerings. I placed an order today for a 138” diagonal screen with the newest soundmax 8K material. Cremer Lee was awesome to work with and sent many photos for me to use in my decision process. Screen is slated to ship on the 8th.




Soundmax 8k? New to me, sounds interesting.

What’s the difference with the 4K version?


----------



## kawiguy998

nielvm said:


> Soundmax 8k? New to me, sounds interesting.
> 
> What’s the difference with the 4K version?


Smoother fabric and more acoustically transparent. It is slightly thinner as well. Oh, and gain remains same per Cremer.


----------



## tommarra

kawiguy998 said:


> Smoother fabric and more acoustically transparent. It is slightly thinner as well. Oh, and gain remains same per Cremer.



Interesting. Would be good to see how much 'better' 8K is to the 4K. I am perfectly happy wiht the 4K but if it is even better acoustically I may spend a couple of hundred for the upgrade since I already have the screen frame


----------



## ryanazarko

kawiguy998 said:


> Just wanted to give a shout out to @nielvm for all the info regarding xy screens offerings. I placed an order today for a 138” diagonal screen with the newest soundmax 8K material. Cremer Lee was awesome to work with and sent many photos for me to use in my decision process. Screen is slated to ship on the 8th.


i'm brand new to this, so sorry if this is a stupid question: Where did you order this from? I'm looking for a budget acoustic transparent screen around ~138"inches


----------



## Volusiano

I got my 120" ALR PET Crystal screen from XY-Screen finally set up with my new Vava 4K projector. Thought I'd share some pics on how well the ALR works during daylight in case anyone is interested to see. The first 4 are during daylight with most of my blinds/shutters closed. The last 4 are with the blinds/shutters open.

Of course darker lighting is still the best. But the ALR seems to do a decent job in bright daylight.


----------



## tommarra

ryanazarko said:


> i'm brand new to this, so sorry if this is a stupid question: Where did you order this from? I'm looking for a budget acoustic transparent screen around ~138"inches


PM niel or me and I can give you their email


----------



## Pip

david8613 said:


> years ago I remember having a 106" high power screen with a cheap incfocus projector and that combo threw such a nice picture. of the xyscreens which of the acoustic models comes kind of close to the picture quality of the awesome high power screen?





nielvm said:


> The soundmax 5 has the highest gain at about 1.2...


3D Metallic Flexible Fabric MF1: Gain 2.4

Pip


----------



## nielvm

Pip said:


> 3D Metallic Flexible Fabric MF1: Gain 2.4
> 
> 
> 
> Pip




Well, such extremely high gain screens aren’t really suitable for HT use imo...


----------



## Garfield9988

Anyone have order from TELON SCREEN (HUIZHOU TELON AUDIO AND VISUAL EQUIPMENT) ? They suppose to have pet crystal screen . . . still waiting for photo. 490$ usd + 170$ usd delivery to canada for 120" screen . . . 1/2 the price of xyscreen !! 


They are available on Alibaba under telon screen.

I do have discussion with Maira Ouyang from telon company ... waiting for more info!


Martin


----------



## Garfield9988

Garfield9988 said:


> Anyone have order from TELON SCREEN (HUIZHOU TELON AUDIO AND VISUAL EQUIPMENT) ? They suppose to have pet crystal screen . . . still waiting for photo. 490$ usd + 170$ usd delivery to canada for 120" screen . . . 1/2 the price of xyscreen !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are available on Alibaba under telon screen.
> 
> 
> 
> I do have discussion with Maira Ouyang from telon company ... waiting for more info!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin



Did buy finally the pet crystal screen 120” from Telon company for 660$ usd including shipping to Canada instead of 1100$ usd from xyscreen. Hopefully it will be a real lenticular screen (pet screen) and quality is good! It seem to be the company who provided screen for elite screen USA same s***t different name !
















Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## tommarra

If it’s the same as Elite I wouldn’t touch it with a 10 foot pole


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## nielvm

*Soundmax 8k*

Recently Xyscreen added the soundmax 8k to their line-up. Thanks to my contact at Xyscreen I got a screen sent to me for review.


General

The soundmax 8k is the successor of the soundmax 4k and has a given gain of 1.0. I noticed instantly that the fabric has a smaller thread, is lighter and allows a tiny bit of stretch. For me, this was the biggest issue with the soundmax 4k, which doesn't allow any stretch and is very hard to get super thight as a DIY-man. In my home theater, I have 3 spots directly above my screen who emphasise every small inaccuracy in the screen. While projecting, I never noticed any flaw though.
With the soundmax 8k, getting the screen super-thight is possible in DIY. I still need to work away some tiny details, but I will definitly get there.

Measurements

My gain measurement is right on the spot compared to the gain given by Xyscreen. The soundmax 4k produced 19ftl, the soundmax 8k is at 17.3. In therms of greyscale, both are very similar.

Acoustically the fabric tends to mute the sound less than the soundmax 4k. When watching the first movie on the screen, it appeared that the center speaker was louder. I made some acoustic measurements to vouch for this impression, but strange enough there appears to be little difference between the two. 
Personally I never found these minor differences in acoustically transparant screens important. The difference that's measurable starts at approximately 5khz and IMO is very easily corrected with the adjustement of gain or equalizing. 


In therm of sharpness, the soundmax 8k seems a tiny bit better than its predecessor.


Conclusion

With the soundmax 8k, Xyscreen introduces a nice follow-up for the soundmax 4k. For me, the biggest advantage is that the fabric is now slightly stretchable, which allows a DIY screen much easier. Others might find the small improvement of acoustic transparacy more important.


----------



## Morphx2

Trying to decide about a 120 motorized screen. Purchased a vividstorm one from Amazon, but it has waves where i think the rollers are after using it a few times. Maybe return or get a replacement from them. XY motorized tension is about 2x the price, but maybe it is better quality?









Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Cremer Lee

Morphx2 said:


> Trying to decide about a 120 motorized screen. Purchased a vividstorm one from Amazon, but it has waves where i think the rollers are after using it a few times. Maybe return or get a replacement from them. XY motorized tension is about 2x the price, but maybe it is better quality?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


What's your projector? And what screen fabric you bought? Why not do with tab tension?


----------



## Morphx2

Cremer Lee said:


> What's your projector? And what screen fabric you bought? Why not do with tab tension?


It is actually tab-tension, but you can not see it in the photo. I think the rollers are leaving an imprint. It is a Vividscreen 120" motorized 0.8 ALR.

With a lot of ambient light during the day time, would the Dark Crystal HG version be good for my Epson 5040UB? The projector is around 14 feet from the screen.


----------



## qlizard

*XYscreen contact info*

Hello, 
Could someone PM the me contact information to obtain xyscreen Soundmax 8k material? I'm interested in a 115" (diagonal) 2.35:1 screen. Do they sell a kit to make a fixed frame unit?
I can't PM anyone yet.


----------



## nielvm

Done


----------



## Johnny nz

Morphx2 said:


> Trying to decide about a 120 motorized screen. Purchased a vividstorm one from Amazon, but it has waves where i think the rollers are after using it a few times. Maybe return or get a replacement from them. XY motorized tension is about 2x the price, but maybe it is better quality?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


i am very interested in a screen like this to match up with the optoma p1 which will be my first projector , sorry that your screen looks so bad


----------



## Cremer Lee

Johnny nz said:


> i am very interested in a screen like this to match up with the optoma p1 which will be my first projector , sorry that your screen looks so bad


optoma p1 very new and great ust projector! you can try the XY PET Crystal.
PET Crystal is a special fabric with sawtooth structure on surface, it can avoid 93% natural light and environment light, to present the real image color. 
Unlike traditional screen, this screen can present image under bright light. It has removed foggy phenomenon, providing bright, vivid and perfect images. 
With 0.8 Gain and 160 degree Visual angle, then audience can see clearly and vivid image in all directions.
It is the best screen for ultra-short throw projector.


----------



## Garfield9988

Did receive my Telon screen sawtooth structure. Pet crystal 

Screen made in thaiwan and frame in China sold as a package from Telon for 490$ + shipping !

Velour trim not on photo










Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Garfield9988

Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Garfield9988

I did not bought yet the projector ....waiting for price drop before Christmas time for wemax A300


































Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Garfield9988

My first impression is overall built quality seem to be very good.

Shipping box is smaller than xyscreen 5 feet long so less expensive for shipping.

Top and bottom extrusions made with 2 parts ....overall rigidity is still very good.

Velour contour “finish trim” is screw instead of clipped like the xyscreen. 

Screen specification here : https://en.iftc.com.tw/cbsp.html

I will be able to judge for image quality ounce projector receive!





Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## howiee

nielvm said:


> *Soundmax 8k*The soundmax 8k is the successor of the soundmax 4k and has a given gain of 1.0.


Chers for the impressions, nielvm. And good thread!

Quick question re. gain. The 4k sounds a little brighter - have you noticed any difference between it and the new 8k re. sheen, sparkling and visible weave? I'm after an AT screen and, while I want decent audio, am more into the video side of things. Up to now Seymour XD has been the main contender due to it's reported gain of 0.9. I'm basically after a material that will let me go as large as possible at ~12ft viewing distance with no sheen and visible weave.


----------



## evanft

I recently received samples of all of XY's acoustically transparent screen material for comparison to my current Elite screen. Here are my thoughts:


The Soundmax 4k and 8k have tighter weaves than the Elite. 
Color appears near identical when viewing actual content.
Both XY materials seem to have slightly higher gain than the elite. We're talking maybe 5% here.
The weave pattern on the 8k is very strange. It's not just a tighter version of the 4k, but is a different pattern.
The pattern on the 8k is visible on light-colored content from my seating position ~10.5' away, though you have to really try to look for it
The weave on the 4k disappears after a couple feet, similar to the Elite

Overall, I found the Soundmax 4k to be a more pleasant looking material than the 8k.


----------



## nielvm

howiee said:


> Chers for the impressions, nielvm. And good thread!
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question re. gain. The 4k sounds a little brighter - have you noticed any difference between it and the new 8k re. sheen, sparkling and visible weave? I'm after an AT screen and, while I want decent audio, am more into the video side of things. Up to now Seymour XD has been the main contender due to it's reported gain of 0.9. I'm basically after a material that will let me go as large as possible at ~12ft viewing distance with no sheen and visible weave.




My seating distabce is about 12ft with a screen size of about 120”. I can’t see the weave or texture of any kind on any of the fabrics...


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## howiee

nielvm said:


> My seating distabce is about 12ft with a screen size of about 120”. I can’t see the weave or texture of any kind on any of the fabrics...
> 
> 
> Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


Appreciated!




evanft said:


> I recently received samples of all of XY's acoustically transparent screen material for comparison to my current Elite screen. Here are my thoughts:
> 
> 
> The Soundmax 4k and 8k have tighter weaves than the Elite.
> Color appears near identical when viewing actual content.
> Both XY materials seem to have slightly higher gain than the elite. We're talking maybe 5% here.
> The weave pattern on the 8k is very strange. It's not just a tighter version of the 4k, but is a different pattern.
> The pattern on the 8k is visible on light-colored content from my seating position ~10.5' away, though you have to really try to look for it
> The weave on the 4k disappears after a couple feet, similar to the Elite
> 
> Overall, I found the Soundmax 4k to be a more pleasant looking material than the 8k.


Cheers for the impressions! Did you notice much/any brightness dofference between the 4k and 8k? Did you notice any visible sheen or sparkling on either?

The 4k is looking very tempting atm.


----------



## evanft

howiee said:


> Cheers for the impressions! Did you notice much/any brightness dofference between the 4k and 8k? Did you notice any visible sheen or sparkling on either?
> 
> The 4k is looking very tempting atm.


I noticed little to no differences between the materials when pairing them with actual content. Maybe if I ran some test slides differences would become clearer, but frankly if I can't see a difference with actual content I don't really care.

I did not see any kind of sheen or sparkle. I believe they're both ~1.0 gain, so I wouldn't expect to see that. The perforated vinyl materials they sent me, however, were quite shiny, though that's to be expected given their higher gain.

My 115" 2.4:1 screen is going to use the 4k material. I think it's genuinely better than the 8k material due to the 8k's texture. 

I would contact XY screen about getting material samples. They sent me samples of all six of their AT materials for $30 shipped to MI, and they arrived in only a few days. Very impressive customer service all around.


----------



## howiee

evanft said:


> I noticed little to no differences between the materials when pairing them with actual content. Maybe if I ran some test slides differences would become clearer, but frankly if I can't see a difference with actual content I don't really care.
> 
> I did not see any kind of sheen or sparkle. I believe they're both ~1.0 gain, so I wouldn't expect to see that. The perforated vinyl materials they sent me, however, were quite shiny, though that's to be expected given their higher gain.
> 
> My 115" 2.4:1 screen is going to use the 4k material. I think it's genuinely better than the 8k material due to the 8k's texture.
> 
> I would contact XY screen about getting material samples. They sent me samples of all six of their AT materials for $30 shipped to MI, and they arrived in only a few days. Very impressive customer service all around.


Much appreciated! I'm a way off getting a screen in place, but will be hitting them up for samples for sure.


----------



## evanft

Selling my plasma has provided the money needed to jump in on my screen a bit earlier than expected. Just confirmed the order.


Electric EC2 Tab-Tensioned
115"
2.40:1 ratio
Soundmax 4k material
Customized top drop to 38 mm (I have an I-beam right where the screen is going to go that prevents me from mounting it any higher.)
Infrared remote
$630 total price: $480 screen + $120 seaway shipping to MI + $30 Paypal fee

I should have it sometime in October. If I wanted it faster, the shipping would have been $250-$300 and I would have had to pick it up at an airport. Definitely not worth it to me.


----------



## Morphx2

I got a quote for around 1200 shipped to new mexico that was a 120 inch motorized tab tension black diamond acoustic ALR. I think the non acoustic ALR was 900ish and the higher gain ALR was 1000.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## evanft

Morphx2 said:


> I got a quote for around 1200 shipped to new mexico that was a 120 inch motorized tab tension black diamond acoustic ALR. I think the non acoustic ALR was 900ish and the higher gain ALR was 1000.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Going with ALR is definitely going to up the price. That material is typically more expensive.


----------



## Gupy

Volusiano said:


> I got my 120" ALR PET Crystal screen from XY-Screen finally set up with my new Vava 4K projector. Thought I'd share some pics on how well the ALR works during daylight in case anyone is interested to see. The first 4 are during daylight with most of my blinds/shutters closed. The last 4 are with the blinds/shutters open.
> 
> Of course darker lighting is still the best. But the ALR seems to do a decent job in bright daylight.


Did you try their ALR screen without an ultra short throw projector? Or is this screen only suitable for the ultra short throw?


----------



## bdht

Gupy said:


> Did you try their ALR screen without an ultra short throw projector? Or is this screen only suitable for the ultra short throw?


Theyre different materials. The standard throw alr material is the black crystal. The ust is the pet crystal.


----------



## bdht

Any information on this material?

https://xyscreen.en.alibaba.com/pro...creen_X3_Crystal_for_Daylight_Projection.html

Curious what minimum throw is, if there's hotspotting and gain artifacts.


----------



## evanft

My screen is finished and should be shipping out soon.


----------



## 145gtw

I'm pretty close to pulling the trigger on one of their set-ups. Can someone give me a brief summary of what ordering from them was like? 

I've never actually bought through Alibaba before and am a bit curious/confused.


----------



## Volusiano

145gtw said:


> I'm pretty close to pulling the trigger on one of their set-ups. Can someone give me a brief summary of what ordering from them was like?
> 
> I've never actually bought through Alibaba before and am a bit curious/confused.


I didn't buy from XY-Screen from Alibaba. I just dealt directly with August Liu from XY-Screen. He's very professional and quick to respond to you. He follows up on everything.


----------



## tommarra

Volusiano said:


> I didn't buy from XY-Screen from Alibaba. I just dealt directly with August Liu from XY-Screen. He's very professional and quick to respond to you. He follows up on everything.




+1 for Lee Cremer. He is great!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tommarra

Anyone have info about their masking system?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 145gtw

Volusiano said:


> I didn't buy from XY-Screen from Alibaba. I just dealt directly with August Liu from XY-Screen. He's very professional and quick to respond to you. He follows up on everything.


Would you mind sending a PM with his contact info when you have a second?


----------



## Nstd

145gtw said:


> Would you mind sending a PM with his contact info when you have a second?




Contact them through alibaba or the website. I’m currently dealing with them right now. They’re pretty good with the email. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cremer Lee

tommarra said:


> Anyone have info about their masking system?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Still not much update. As quite busy for some other new projection screens. Will keep you update.


----------



## noob00224

What are the types of UST materials that do well for lateral light?
The Fresnel? Crystal?
What about the Gird?


----------



## asharma

evanft said:


> My screen is finished and should be shipping out soon.


Is it just me, or do I see banding on that screen?


----------



## tommarra

asharma said:


> Is it just me, or do I see banding on that screen?




I have had it for about seven months and haven’t seen any banding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scottphillips88

Maestrosc said:


> Really enjoyed the review.
> 
> Am looking for/considering an AT screen for a new hometheater build.
> 
> Wasnt a huge fan of people stepping in to say that it "isnt fair for hobbyist to write reviews of products" its kind of the entire point of this forum. But I wont derail this thread.
> 
> Was curious if you compared this to something like a spandex screen with black backing and had any input on the difference in terms of visual performance?
> 
> I am looking to make the move to 4k, and while everyone raves about the price/performance of spandex, I want to make sure I will actually be able to make use of my 4k projection system, and not be thwarted at the final step by a cheap screen.
> 
> Getting honest reviews and opinions of products on this particular subject can be kind of a pain, because more and more companies are spending time on here and whenever a competitor or a cheaper alternative gets a positive review, they all jump out to try to defend their products and more importantly their price-points. This happens moreso in the screen section, than any other section on AVSforum imo.


Would you mind sharing what you ended up doing? I'm in your exact situation....just a year later than you. Thanks!


----------



## nielvm

Some news from xyscreen: they updated their masking screen. The screen is now lighter thus easier to ship.

Fresh from their R&D department, prices are not yet available...

[email address removed as it doesn't belong to the poster]


































Video:
https://streamable.com/7o1qv


----------



## evanft

My screen is in California waiting to clear customs. Can't wait to get it and tell everyone how it is.


----------



## TimHuey

evanft said:


> My screen is finished and should be shipping out soon.


What aspect ratio is that 2.35 or 2.39?


----------



## Boschpants

Received some grey/ALR materials from XY Screens (thanks August!) I have to say that the Black Crystal .9 seemed much better to me than the .8 version. However I couldn't get over the overall darkness of the image? There was a sample for the MF1 material which actually had decent blacks (not as good as BC .8/.9) and a better viewing angle than the Black Crystal materials. Might be a good material for people to check out.

I also tried out some of the high gain materials which were like solar flares going off on my wall. Super bright but incredibly bad off-axis performance, to no surprise.


----------



## jw131313

evanft said:


> My screen is in California waiting to clear customs. Can't wait to get it and tell everyone how it is.


I have been emailing with XY about a 120" flush mount in-ceiling motorized tab-tension screen. Apparently, the package is too large for air freight and has to be shipped by ocean. Is yours arriving that way too? May I ask how you handled the customs/local delivery part of the deal?


----------



## evanft

jw131313 said:


> I have been emailing with XY about a flush mount in-ceiling motorized tab-tension screen. Apparently, the package is too large for air freight and has to be shipped by ocean. Is yours arriving that way too? May I ask how you handled the customs/local delivery part of the deal?


Yes, ocean. I don't really handle it. The package is simply handed to UPS once it's cleared.


----------



## jw131313

evanft said:


> Yes, ocean. I don't really handle it. The package is simply handed to UPS once it's cleared.


Did you order directly or through alibaba? another retailer? I was working directly, but still have questions about how to handle the customs, etc since they told me they'd only ship to port.
They haven't offered that service to me. Happy to PM you if that's easier, but I've searched around for this kind of info/advice. Maybe others have too?


----------



## Morphx2

jw131313 said:


> Did you order directly or through alibaba? another retailer?
> 
> They haven't offered that service to me. Happy to PM you if that's easier, but I've searched around for this kind of info/advice. Maybe others have too?


Do direct

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## evanft

I dealt directly with them through email.

They work with a forwarder who handles everything on their end.


----------



## bdht

Boschpants said:


> I have to say that the Black Crystal .9 seemed much better to me than the .8 version. However I couldn't get over the overall darkness of the image?


Whats the .9 material like? can you get a good close up photo?

But yes the .8 does need more light. If the 0.8 gain rating is directly onaxis then a more average rating for the whole screen is probably 0.6 gain. Once you hit it with more light the its bright and without another material for direct comparison whites look nice and white


----------



## Boschpants

bdht said:


> Whats the .9 material like? can you get a good close up photo?
> 
> But yes the .8 does need more light. If the 0.8 gain rating is directly onaxis then a more average rating for the whole screen is probably 0.6 gain. Once you hit it with more light the its bright and without another material for direct comparison whites look nice and white


If you have materials next to each other, you can tell the .9 is just ever so slightly lighter in color but once the image is projected on them, the .9 is a decent amount lighter while also holding the blacks just as well as the .8. Same viewing angle between the two as well. Still not sure what direction I'll go for screen material but I did appreciate that their screens didn't tint the colors hardly at all. Lower gain and brightness of course, but there wasn't a skew in colors of the whites or primary colors. That was true across the MF1, Black Crystal and HG.


----------



## bdht

Boschpants said:


> Still not sure what direction I'll go for screen material


I believe the have another long throw material with 1.7 gain and 160degree viewing angle.

https://m.alibaba.com/product/62200087298/XY-Screen-120-inch-High-Gain.html

Did the 0.9 material have similar or less sparkle? what throw distance were you using?


----------



## Boschpants

bdht said:


> Boschpants said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still not sure what direction I'll go for screen material
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the have another long throw material with 1.7 gain and 160degree viewing angle.
> 
> https://m.alibaba.com/product/62200087298/XY-Screen-120-inch-High-Gain.html
> 
> Did the 0.9 material have similar or less sparkle? what throw distance were you using?
Click to expand...

I had the 1.7 X3 HG on hand, not the black crystal HG. I am projecting from 13 feet away. Texture is same on the .9 to my eyes


----------



## bdht

Boschpants said:


> I had the 1.7 X3 HG on hand, not the black crystal HG.


Hows this material?

I am projecting from 13 feet away. Texture is same on the .9 to my eyes[/QUOTE]
hows hotspotting at that distance?


----------



## Boschpants

bdht said:


> Boschpants said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had the 1.7 X3 HG on hand, not the black crystal HG.
> 
> 
> 
> Hows this material?
> 
> I am projecting from 13 feet away. Texture is same on the .9 to my eyes
Click to expand...

hows hotspotting at that distance?[/QUOTE]

This is the one that was super bright and likely higher than 1.7 gain. The viewing angle was terrible. I can't speak to hot spotting since I'm working with sample sizes.


----------



## Pip

Boschpants said:


> hows hotspotting at that distance?


This is the one that was super bright and likely higher than 1.7 gain. The viewing angle was terrible. I can't speak to hot spotting since I'm working with sample sizes.[/QUOTE]

From where did you et a sample? Amy more observations would be appreciated. The narrow viewing angle seems to indicate either retroreflective or fresnel?

Thanks,

Pip


----------



## Boschpants

Pip said:


> From where did you et a sample? Amy more observations would be appreciated. The narrow viewing angle seems to indicate either retroreflective or fresnel?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Pip


The material is stiff and not like normal vinyl or fabric. Very retroreflective. I paid $35 for the samples and worked with one of their sales reps on WhatsApp


----------



## jw131313

Anyone have any experience or feedback on XY's WG1-Pro 4K material?

That's what I've been quoted, but wondering if it'll be a good fit for my setup. 
In-ceiling tab tension screen with an Epson HC 3800 located 15' away and viewing area around 13.5 to 14' away. The screen sits in front of several large windows, and I'll be managing the light with shades.


----------



## Dave in Green

To be clear, retroreflective has a very specific meaning when applied to video screens. A retroreflective screen reflects any light hitting it directly back at the source. That means it reflects image light from the projector 180 degrees back at the projector as well as any ambient light 180 degrees back at each ambient light source. There are very few examples of true retroreflective screen material available anywhere.


----------



## yenal

Did anyone have a chance to compare the Vivid Storm 0.8 gain ALR for standard throw with XY screen Black Crystal 0.8 gain standard throw? I wonder if they are exactly the same material.


----------



## Morphx2

yenal said:


> Did anyone have a chance to compare the Vivid Storm 0.8 gain ALR for standard throw with XY screen Black Crystal 0.8 gain standard throw? I wonder if they are exactly the same material.


Same

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## yenal

Morphx2 said:


> Same
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Are you happy with your Vivid Storm screen? Is there any difference than say using a white screen? I am a little bit worried that during nighttime viewing HDR won’t be great due to low gain.


----------



## Morphx2

yenal said:


> Are you happy with your Vivid Storm screen? Is there any difference than say using a white screen? I am a little bit worried that during nighttime viewing HDR won’t be great due to low gain.


I wrote a review on Amazon, probably the most recent one. I had a wrinkle but with movies you cant really tell. They gave me half off, then a few weeks later they gave me half off again. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## yenal

Morphx2 said:


> I wrote a review on Amazon, probably the most recent one. I had a wrinkle but with movies you cant really tell. They gave me half off, then a few weeks later they gave me half off again.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Do you use any horizontal lens shift? I was wondering how this screen would behave if the projector is not completely centered.


----------



## Morphx2

yenal said:


> Do you use any horizontal lens shift? I was wondering how this screen would behave if the projector is not completely centered.


Yes

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## noob00224

yenal said:


> I was wondering how this screen would behave if the projector is not completely centered.


This fabric is angular type ALR. It means it reflects the light at the same angle it hits the screen.


----------



## yenal

noob00224 said:


> This fabric is angular type ALR. It means it reflects the light at the same angle it hits the screen.


Isn't this how light behaves normally when it hits a flat surface? Are they simply super flat materials?


----------



## noob00224

yenal said:


> Isn't this how light behaves normally when it hits a flat surface? Are they simply super flat materials?


Non ALR fabrics, matte fabrics, diffuse light at ~160 degrees angle.










Angular type ALR are like a mirror, the light will hit the surface at one angle and send it back at the same angle, in the opposite way. The user must be in the way of that reflected light beam. If they are not and they look at the screen, the image will seem dimmer.
Which is why some angular ALR's have a lower viewing angle. 

The same happens with ambient light, if light comes from above, it gets reflected towards the ground. If it's from the right, it gets send to the left.
If the light is the projector beam in front of the screen, it gets sent back at the same angle. 
If there is another light from the same direction as the projector, that will be send back towards the area of the projector/viewer as well.

The projector must be placed in such a way that the reflected beam of light reaches the viewer's position.
It cannot be too close, or the angle that the light will reflect will be too high.


----------



## noah katz

Pip said:


> The narrow viewing angle seems to indicate either retroreflective or fresnel?



Not necessarily; all types of high gain screens have narrow viewing angles.


----------



## Pip

Boschpants said:


> ...The viewing angle was terrible. ...





Pip said:


> ...The narrow viewing angle seems to indicate either retroreflective or fresnel?...





noah katz said:


> Not necessarily; all types of high gain screens have narrow viewing angles.


You are correct. The adjective "terrible" prompted my question.

Pip


----------



## jw131313

evanft said:


> My screen is in California waiting to clear customs. Can't wait to get it and tell everyone how it is.


Did you get your screen? How'd it turn out?


----------



## evanft

jw131313 said:


> Did you get your screen? How'd it turn out?


It's actually still in customs, apparently.

Does anyone have any other good contacts at XY or the logistics company they use in the USA?


----------



## jw131313

evanft said:


> It's actually still in customs, apparently.
> 
> Does anyone have any other good contacts at XY or the logistics company they use in the USA?


I'll PM you


----------



## tlkmx

I've just received my Benq w1720 screen and i've been in contact with someone over at XYscreen
Thing is the person isnt that helpful.. 

The projector is 4k and pretty bright or at least i think so ?? how could i be sure ?.. 
I think i want to avoid ALR i mostly watch stuff at night and can control the light coming from any place.
The wall are wood and doesnt reflect too much light (i will deal with the light reflecting to the wood ceiling.. 

So i thought about getting a nice screen material with a 1.0 gain from them but the website is pretty bad to scroll throught.

Any ideas what i should get from XY ?
4k screen white with a 1.0 gain ?


----------



## noob00224

What is the minimum recommended throw for the Black Crystal 0.8 and HG?


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

So Im looking to get my screen in advance of my room being refurbished. I will be getting the Benq HT3550 or TK850 (depending on what the reviews say as I watch sports during the day and like the flexibility it offers).

With thank in mind - what would be the best motorized screen for me? Was thinking the Black Crystal but would like to validate with those more intelligent to me.

Neil, Lee - Please can you let me know a price for a 100" motorised delivered to the UK.

Thanks!


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> What is the minimum recommended throw for the Black Crystal 0.8 and HG?


DES is a good metric as they say 1.9, 2.0+ throw ratio for similar materials.
https://www.darkenergyscreens.com/


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> So Im looking to get my screen in advance of my room being refurbished. I will be getting the Benq HT3550 or TK850 (depending on what the reviews say as I watch sports during the day and like the flexibility it offers).
> 
> With thank in mind - what would be the best motorized screen for me? Was thinking the Black Crystal but would like to validate with those more intelligent to me.
> 
> Neil, Lee - Please can you let me know a price for a 100" motorised delivered to the UK.
> 
> Thanks!


On a 100" .8 gain screen, the ht3550 in high lamp with its p3 filter would give you 700 lumens or 19fl, which is a little low for hdr, good for sdr with the lights off, without the filter though it can do 1300lumens or 35fl which is very bright, good for hdr, and good for sports with the lights on.

The high gain screen is useful if you have bright direct light hitting the screen from the sides, as it will reject that light, but viewing angles will be poor for anyone not sitting close to the middle of the screen, e.g. a dimmer image. It can give you that brightness for hdr but won't be as uniform an image, and you only need that p3 color filter mode for hdr as well so that doesnt seem like the best trade off.

In any situation where the room isnt dedicated and mostly fabric a darker grey alr screen is a good choice.

If you really want a less washed out image if the tk850 can get around 2500 to 3500 lumens you can get a cheaper retractable screen and paint it a .25 gain black. At 3000 lumens on a 100" screen that gives you 25fl. Lot more work and im not aware of any screens like that that you can buy.

The tk850 at 2500 lumens on the .8 gain screen however would be giving you 65fl, which is way too bright, this projector also sacrifices color brightness to hit that output and wont look as color vibrant as the ht3550.

It sounds like a bc.8 and the ht3550 are a good combo for you.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

bdht said:


> On a 100" .8 gain screen, the ht3550 in high lamp with its p3 filter would give you 700 lumens or 19fl, which is a little low for hdr, good for sdr with the lights off, without the filter though it can do 1300lumens or 35fl which is very bright, good for hdr, and good for sports with the lights on.
> 
> The high gain screen is useful if you have bright direct light hitting the screen from the sides, as it will reject that light, but viewing angles will be poor for anyone not sitting close to the middle of the screen, e.g. a dimmer image. It can give you that brightness for hdr but won't be as uniform an image, and you only need that p3 color filter mode for hdr as well so that doesnt seem like the best trade off.
> 
> In any situation where the room isnt dedicated and mostly fabric a darker grey alr screen is a good choice.
> 
> If you really want a less washed out image if the tk850 can get around 2500 to 3500 lumens you can get a cheaper retractable screen and paint it a .25 gain black. At 3000 lumens on a 100" screen that gives you 25fl. Lot more work and im not aware of any screens like that that you can buy.
> 
> The tk850 at 2500 lumens on the .8 gain screen however would be giving you 65fl, which is way too bright, this projector also sacrifices color brightness to hit that output and wont look as color vibrant as the ht3550.
> 
> It sounds like a bc.8 and the ht3550 are a good combo for you.


 @bdht

Thanks so much for the detailed response, very much appreciated. The setup of the room is that the screen is in front of a bay window. Yes I will have shutters but these are not fully light blocking and during the day I know the kids will not close them as well, I also know when watching football I prefer a light room. Hence I was looking for a compromise between performance and practicality. I honestly thought the TK850 would be it but obviously from your expertise this is not the case!


----------



## daveb975

evanft said:


> Selling my plasma has provided the money needed to jump in on my screen a bit earlier than expected. Just confirmed the order.
> 
> 
> Electric EC2 Tab-Tensioned
> 115"
> 2.40:1 ratio
> Soundmax 4k material
> Customized top drop to 38 mm (I have an I-beam right where the screen is going to go that prevents me from mounting it any higher.)
> Infrared remote
> $630 total price: $480 screen + $120 seaway shipping to MI + $30 Paypal fee
> 
> I should have it sometime in October. If I wanted it faster, the shipping would have been $250-$300 and I would have had to pick it up at an airport. Definitely not worth it to me.


Did your screen arrive yet?

I'd be interested to find out how well the Soundmax 4K material tensions on your screen, as it is about the only complaint I have with mine (100" 16:9).

My screen has some ripples in it and the tab tensioning doesn't seem to resolve it. I don't know if there is any way to adjust it at the top or just the bottom?

It's not a major issue on most content fortunately - it shows up on fast panning sports and a page of text looks a bit 'wonky', but for general films/TV it is harder to see.

I don't know if it is the EC2 tensioning system that is at fault or just that this type of material is hard to tension.

It's a shame because I'm delighted with the screen apart from that. The two things that I was worried about were the black surround not being dark enough for the overspill from my Benq HT3550 and the thin material with no backing causing reflections on the TV behind. Neither have been a problem at all.


----------



## Luis Gonzalez

*UST - ALR screen Help*

Hello Everyone,


I am in need of a solution for my living room. Especially since I convinced my wife to go with projection vs. a TV. Besides going with something crazy like a Black Diamond screen. What's going to be the best solution for ALR with a UST projector? I have an Optoma 320UST. The sun is killing our viewing abilities during the day. I have seen XYscreen's but they want 1200 for a 120" screen, surely there is an alternative that will perform just as well for a smaller cost. (At least I hope) 


P.S. - I have tried a variety of grey paints, and while they do help.. I just feel having a proper screen for UST would be best solution.

Thanks ins advance!


----------



## Luis Gonzalez

Volusiano said:


> I got my 120" ALR PET Crystal screen from XY-Screen finally set up with my new Vava 4K projector. Thought I'd share some pics on how well the ALR works during daylight in case anyone is interested to see. The first 4 are during daylight with most of my blinds/shutters closed. The last 4 are with the blinds/shutters open.
> 
> Of course darker lighting is still the best. But the ALR seems to do a decent job in bright daylight.


How much was the screen if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## noob00224

Luis Gonzalez said:


> Hello Everyone,
> 
> 
> I am in need of a solution for my living room. Especially since I convinced my wife to go with projection vs. a TV. Besides going with something crazy like a Black Diamond screen. What's going to be the best solution for ALR with a UST projector? I have an Optoma 320UST. The sun is killing our viewing abilities during the day. I have seen XYscreen's but they want 1100 for a 120" screen, surely there is an alternative that will perform just as well for a smaller cost. (At least I hope)
> 
> 
> P.S. - I have tried a variety of grey paints, and while they do help.. I just feel having a proper screen for UST would be best solution.
> 
> Thanks ins advance!


An ALR screen will not help if there is too much ambient light in the room.
Light must not hit the screen directly, light can be placed in the seating area, not the screen area. 
Treating the walls with darker paint of fabrics to absorb some of the light will help.

If there is medium-high to high ambient light a TV would be more appropriate.


----------



## Run&Gun

Luis Gonzalez said:


> Hello Everyone,
> 
> 
> I am in need of a solution for my living room. Especially since I convinced my wife to go with projection vs. a TV. Besides going with something crazy like a Black Diamond screen. What's going to be the best solution for ALR with a UST projector? I have an Optoma 320UST. The sun is killing our viewing abilities during the day. I have seen XYscreen's but they want 1100 for a 120" screen, surely there is an alternative that will perform just as well for a smaller cost. (At least I hope)
> 
> 
> P.S. - I have tried a variety of grey paints, and while they do help.. I just feel having a proper screen for UST would be best solution.
> 
> Thanks ins advance!


See my response with pics in the thread you started this morning. But I think you're going to be disappointed, because an ALR screen is not going to give satisfactory results in your environment.


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> @bdht
> 
> Thanks so much for the detailed response, very much appreciated. The setup of the room is that the screen is in front of a bay window. Yes I will have shutters but these are not fully light blocking and during the day I know the kids will not close them as well, I also know when watching football I prefer a light room. Hence I was looking for a compromise between performance and practicality. I honestly thought the TK850 would be it but obviously from your expertise this is not the case!


Light from behind the screen is better than light to the sides or above. While it will raise the overall ambient light level of the room, which raises your black level, you won't get as severe of washout like when light directly hits the screen. When its not a dedicated room(dark fabric walls and no light sources), its a good idea to try starting with a cheap (just $60 for motorized for those who need retractable) screen and a cheap used projector before spending 1, 2, 3k so you can gain first hand experience with the physics of projection, as its drastically different than how a tv functions.

I personally just dont enjoy the look of very bright projectors with very low color brightness, especially when you see them next to a tv alr screen or not :/ Really I view ALR screens as offsetting imperfect rooms with the lights off, and the ambient light from the projector/screen into the room, not for daytime viewing. 

The tk850 is the same projector as the ht3550 with a different color wheel, same bulb, same power draw. But instead of 90-100% color brightness you get 50% and the image looks washed out anyway. You can always use brilliant color and increase brightness at the expense of color output without sacrificing the better color wheel and better color modes. I dont find myself using brilliant color though, better to hit your desired light output level.

Even if we shave off 20% of the ht3550s light output for bulb age and use 0.6 as the gain figure for the screen, youre still looking at 25fl which is a bright image. Since youre screen size isnt 120, 130, 150" you dont need as high of a light output. 

For your viewing conditions in the future keep an eye out for rgb laser as these projectors paired with a blacker screen material will really enable ambient light viewing for projection, due to their very high light output, lower power consumption/heat output compared to uhp bulb projectors with the same light output, and extremely good color ability. Until then something like a BenQ HT9060. These are very bright for LED projectors(1000 to 1400 lumens) and have a very wide native color gamut. While using the native gamut is incorrect for everything but uhd content, the increased saturation improves perceived brightness and appears to wash out less in high ambient light. The nature of the led dlp light engine also improves perceived brightness due to the lack of a color wheel, better color depth, reduced solarizations, reduced flicker. And of course using leds they dont lose brightness as fast as bulbs and you dont have to replace them, 20-30k hours before half of their initial brightness. Maybe as laser and high output led becomes more prevalent we'll start seeing low gain blacker screen materials.

I have a similar situation where viewing of high average display level content(think sports, desktop brightness, cartoons) is done in high ambient light with direct light hitting the screen. With a similar led dlp projector with a wide gamut I only need 200lumens at 80" for comfortable brightness. Colors are vibrant and the only image flaw in that scenario is black levels. All things the same, say if I use 400 lumens the image is uncomfortably bright. Or using that 400 lumens with less bright content, your average scripted scifi fantasy televsion program, provides a nice image in high ambient light for everything except blacks, shadows, etc, I was quite shocked the first time I tried that content with lights on, its something Ive never been able to do before. And that 400 lumens is a good brightness for lights out viewing.

So... color brightness and saturation fight ambient light better than increased light output, dont sacrifice colors for light, increased light output should be used to compensate for lower gain darker/blacker screens. Think about it this way, you increase the light output to compensate for darker areas of the image washing out in ambient light, but the brighter areas dont wash out as much and become uncomfortably bright, and the darker areas are still washed out because they simply dont have the luminance to overpower the high ambient light and the screen isnt low gain enough to reject the ambient light. Better to hit a desired brightness, maintain color brightness, let saturation offset the ambient light, and compress the dynamic range by increasing gamma(1.8-2.0) and brightness settings. Hopefully in the future lower gain blacker materials will be available with rgb laser and then the black material and the high output from the projector offsets ambient and even some direct light.


----------



## noob00224

@bdht
Is the Optoma ZH403 a RGB laser projector?

What is the screen you're using with what 200lm projector?


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> @bdht
> Is the Optoma ZH403 a RGB laser projector?
> 
> What is the screen you're using with what 200lm projector?


Nope, blue laser yellow phosphur and a color wheel. No rgb laser affordable front projection yet, theres the lg ust, the hisense ust, but after that youre talking large venue projectors. 

The black crystal 0.8 gain, and its a 400 lumen projector(runco q750i) with a 1 stop nd filter and typically using the native gamut in high ambient light. 

Im about to switch it up so the black crystal is used with a sim2 mico40(500-600 lumens and I need an expensive conversion lens to fill my 92" screen lol) and Im going to paint a separate screen a 0.25 gain black to use with an 800 lumen rgb led projector(vivitek h9090) for lights on, which will be at 80".

And I cant recommend anyone target ~10fl. That just seems to be working in a very specific situation.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

So after speaking with XY they suggest that the BC ALR screen (0.8 gain) will be washed out with a 2000 lumen projector and ambient light and that I should consider High Gain 2.5 Gain 3D silver which also supports Active 3D and passive 3D and 4K.

I’m confused as to what screen now? Any advice gratefully received, for me this is a big investment so I would like to be sure.


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> So after speaking with XY they suggest that the BC ALR screen (0.8 gain) will be washed out with a 2000 lumen projector and ambient light and that I should consider High Gain 2.5 Gain 3D silver which also supports Active 3D and passive 3D and 4K.
> 
> I’m confused as to what screen now? Any advice gratefully received, for me this is a big investment so I would like to be sure.


See attached image, that's what that high gain screen will look like. I'm pretty sure they advertise their BC.8 as having "90%" ambient light rejection ;] 2000 lumens on a 100" .8 gain screen is 55fl, that's very bright, the cinema standard is about 16fl with a white or silver screen. The darker grey of the bc.8 offsets low ambient light/cross reflections and maintains a lower black level. The high gain will reject direct side/overhead light more aggressively but at the expense of image uniformity. If the main source of light coming in the room is from behind the screen, then that side/overhead rejetion isnt as useful except for reflective walls/ceiling in close proximity to the screen.


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> So after speaking with XY they suggest that the BC ALR screen (0.8 gain) will be washed out with a 2000 lumen projector and ambient light and that I should consider High Gain 2.5 Gain 3D silver which also supports Active 3D and passive 3D and 4K.
> 
> I’m confused as to what screen now? Any advice gratefully received, for me this is a big investment so I would like to be sure.


Active 3D support. Nice of them to add this to the screen.

How far away is the projector and what type of projector?

Where is the ambient light coming from and what type is it?


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

@noob00224

Sorry I missed your earlier request, hope this helps.

How far away is the projector and what type of projector? Benq HT3550 or possibly the new Benq tk850. 

Where is the ambient light coming from and what type is it?
It’s from behind the screws (bay window) generally when I watch sports.
@bdht

Thanks for the clarification, your knowledge has really helped.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> @noob00224
> 
> Sorry I missed your earlier request, hope this helps.
> 
> How far away is the projector and what type of projector? Benq HT3550 or possibly the new Benq tk850.
> 
> Where is the ambient light coming from and what type is it?
> It’s from behind the screws (bay window) generally when I watch sports.
> 
> @bdht
> 
> Thanks for the clarification, your knowledge has really helped.


Whoops I meant screen not screws...and its natural daylight


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> @*noob00224*
> 
> Sorry I missed your earlier request, hope this helps.
> 
> How far away is the projector and what type of projector? Benq HT3550 or possibly the new Benq tk850.
> 
> Where is the ambient light coming from and what type is it?
> It’s from behind the screws (bay window) generally when I watch sports.
> 
> @*bdht*
> 
> Thanks for the clarification, your knowledge has really helped.


Both these projectors don't have a throw range higher than 1.47x. Even the 0.8 gain screen will very likely hotspot at that throw range, no to mention the 2.5 gain.

If you want to use an ALR, unless you're ok with a hotspot (with the 0.8 screen, the 2.5 will be too bad), get a projector with a longer throw. Space is required to place it further back. Throw should be 1.9x or higher:
https://www.projectorcentral.com/Epson-Home_Cinema_3800-projection-calculator-pro.htm


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

noob00224 said:


> Both these projectors don't have a throw range higher than 1.47x. Even the 0.8 gain screen will very likely hotspot at that throw range, no to mention the 2.5 gain.
> 
> If you want to use an ALR, unless you're ok with a hotspot (with the 0.8 screen, the 2.5 will be too bad), get a projector with a longer throw. Space is required to place it further back. Throw should be 1.9x or higher:
> https://www.projectorcentral.com/Epson-Home_Cinema_3800-projection-calculator-pro.htm


Thanks, Im limited on how far back i can go, but if I am reading this right if I brought the PJ closer to the screen (10"7) I would be ok with the HT3550. Any further and the TK850 would be better? Taking into account this has nothing to do with PQ as per the info from bdht? Apologies for all, the questions, im learning on the job!


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks, Im limited on how far back i can go, but if I am reading this right if I brought the PJ closer to the screen (10"7) I would be ok with the HT3550. Any further and the TK850 would be better? Taking into account this has nothing to do with PQ as per the info from bdht? Apologies for all, the questions, im learning on the job!


Kind of. You can look at all this as uniformity. There are 3 main aspects that contribute to uniformity with projection.

1. The projectors lens and light source. The ht3550 has about 60% uniformity, on a solid bright image the center of the image will look brighter than the corners. The HT9060 should have near perfect uniformity due to the lens and the leds. 

2. The screens half gain angle, as you move off to the side the image dims with lower half gain. Lambertian or 180° half gain means light is reflected evenly, so you can stand to the side of the screen and its the same brightness. The black crystal .8 gain has an 80° half gain and looks fairly uniform, the black crystal high gain has a 40° and the corners will look dimmer when sitting at center, and the image will dim if sitting to the sides.

3. Projection screens require a specific distance from the screen to the lens to avoid a phenomenon called hot spotting. Very matte surfaces like the Stewart Studiotek 100 show virtually no hot spotting at any distance. The black crystal .8 gain should probably shoot for a 1.8-1.9 minimum and the black crystal high gain requires a long throw probably over 2.0. Hotspotting also tends to make gain artifacts or screen imperfections more noticeable, sparkle, speckle, sheen, etc. 

At this price range and with limited space, however, you can only do so much. For instance I have the Black Crystal 0.8 gain, and with a BenQ W1070(50% uniformity) at a 1.5 throw, uniformity is fairly poor but its not necessarily distracting. But with a Sim2 mico40(near perfect uniformity) and a throw distance of 1.5, uniformity from hotspotting is only noticeable on solid bright images, I dont know that uniformity from the screen is really visible unless displaying full white.

What is the max distance you can place the projector from the screen?


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

Thanks! I’m at max distance at 11ft ☹


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks! I’m at max distance at 11ft ☹


Thats 11' wall to wall?


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

Nope...from the furthest lens position based in a 1.5 ft projector depth. I’m at the property tomorrow so will ask the builder for final measures and report back


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Nope...from the furthest lens position based in a 1.5 ft projector depth. I’m at the property tomorrow so will ask the builder for final measures and report back


Gotcha, so ya on average your throw ratio is going to be around 1.5, so I'd avoid those high gain screens. 

I'm not aware of a better screen for that situation at that price. It's a darker grey compared to most of what's available, has good viewing angles, and gain artifacts are comparable to most alr screens. For my unit, the screen is nice and flat, no waves, no wrinkles/ripples, no visible roller lines in the image.

In the future you can consider something like the Da-Lite Parallax .8, which wont be subject to hotspotting, has no gain artifacting, has a wide horizontal viewing angles, completely rejects light from above and below(which results in a low vertical viewing angle but not an issue if eye height is at 1/3 image height or higher). Or wait for actual black materials or paint a budget screen a 0.25gain black and use a brighter solid state projector.

We can discuss alternative projector options if you'd like, send noob or I a pm, but really benq offers good affordable units, long bulb life, good brightness, and a nice image for the price.


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks, Im limited on how far back i can go, but if I am reading this right if I brought the PJ closer to the screen (10"7) I would be ok with the HT3550. Any further and the TK850 would be better? Taking into account this has nothing to do with PQ as per the info from bdht? Apologies for all, the questions, im learning on the job!


Why would placing the HT3550 closer be better? It would be worse.
ALR related artifacts to affect do affect PQ.

This kind of setup is more and more familiar, relatively small untreated rooms with/without ambient light, with small throw distance. 
Short answer is a TV.
I haven't tried bdht's setup with a low gain (i.e. 0.25) screen and a solid state projector.

I don't believe there are any ALR screens that would have NO hotspot at short throw ratios. Some screens with less light rejecting properties may have a diminished hotspot, but at 1.5x or lower it's a risky proposition. 
The higher the ambient light rejecting properties, the longer the required throw range.

Any ALR can have a hotspot. It's less to do with the quality of the fabric and even the gain and other characteristics, and more to do with the technology, of how angular ALR works.

_The optical coating is used to increase the reflectivity and hence the brightness of the image, so it doesn't get too dim. The coating also makes the reflective characteristics of the gray screen more mirror-like in it's directionality, so that the projector light is reflected more towards the viewer, less on to the surrounding walls. (If you are facing a white wall and someone shines a fashlight from above your head on an angle at the wall, the white wall will diffuse the light and light will scatter everywhere, lighting up the rest of the room, like a white screen does. Replace the wall with a mirror - now there is no diffusion of the image of the flashlight - what you see reflected is the focused beam of light right into your eyes). In this way, gray screens with optical gain can have a satisfyingly bright image while also helping maintain good contrast if you have some ambient light, or reflective room surfaces.

BUT...there is a trade off. When you add optical coating to make the reflection more mirror-like, you are of necessity focusing the light to a smaller central area of the screen. This results in uneven screen illumination known as "hot-spotting," where - especially apparent if you have a blank white image - you can see the projector beam being focused more in the center of the screen, and the screen dims significantly as you move off center to the edges of the screen. So it's like a mild spot-light effect in terms of brightness.

_If you want to see how the hotspot manifests itself in different lightning and type of picture scenarios. check this posts. In my posts, the hotspot on bright screen looks better IRL, but not by much. The camera can affect how the hotspot looks in pictures:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-screens/2122202-aeon-elite-screen-cinegrey-3d-9.html#post58809924

There may be a paint mix that you can paint on a budget screen, but I don't know if it will fare any better in high ambient light.
If you're willing to paint, maybe give that a try. 




bdht said:


> In the future you can consider something like the Da-Lite Parallax .8, which wont be subject to hotspotting, has no gain artifacting, has a wide horizontal viewing angles, completely rejects light from above and below(which results in a low vertical viewing angle but not an issue if eye height is at 1/3 image height or higher). Or wait for actual black materials or paint a budget screen a 0.25gain black and use a brighter solid state projector.


What about a projector with high color lumens like the HC1060 and a 0.25 gain screen?

I haven't tested other ALR's personally, but from the specifications I don't see how the Parallax 0.8 will not have any artifacts.
Parallax Pure 0.8 claims a 0.8 gain, 85 degree horizontal half gain, 17 degrees vertical half gain, and a recommended 1.5x (or higher) throw.
https://www.legrandav.com/en/produc...rojection/ambient_light_rejection/parallax_08
The specifications look very similar to the XY BC 0.8, with maybe the exception of the vertical half gain.

The dnp Supernova 08-85 is identical in specifications:
https://www.dnp-screens.com/media/1706/gainchart_supernova08-85.pdf
https://www.comm-tec.de/de/bilder-und-dateien/artikel/specsheet_supernovablade-2.pdf

The EVP DarkStar 9:
https://epvscreens.com/screen-materials/
0.9 gain, minimum throw 1.5x, 180 degree viewing angle.


Have you tried these ones?

Greyhawk G4:
0.9 gain, 1.3x minimum throw, 75 degree half gain.
https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/grayhawk-g4

Elunevision Aurora ALR:
1.3 gain, 1.2x minimum throw, 61 degrees half gain.
https://elunevision.com/materials/aurora-4k-ambient-light-rejection/


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> Short answer is a TV.


I'm in the same boat a TV just won't work. The screen comes down in front of a closet. I have a 42" tv on the wall between the door and the closet but that's about all the room there is ;[



noob00224 said:


> I haven't tried bdht's setup with a low gain (i.e. 0.25) screen and a solid state projector.
> 
> What about a projector with high color lumens like the HC1060 and a 0.25 gain screen?


I'm sure there are people in the DIY forum who have low gain screens and very bright projectors. Typically the problem is either sacrificing image quality for light output, or having a very very bright projector to maintain image quality, which comes at the cost of heat output, power consumption, and reduced bulb life. The laser projectors offset those limitations. In any case, a black material is the best option(really the only option as far as image quality is concerned) for high ambient light projection. You can avoid washout and reject light with a fresnel screen but your black is still going to be a light gray.

Huh... 2500 lumens, 6k hour bulb life, 300w. That should work. 100" .25gain screen would give you 21fl. The only concern is panel degradation with LCD and high light output, keep those filters/air intakes clean!. LCD also has a fairly low pixel fill, inferior mtf, overshoots, etc. etc., so if sports and motion are a concern, DLP is a better choice.



noob00224 said:


> I don't believe there are any ALR screens that would have NO hotspot at short throw ratios. Some screens with less light rejecting properties may have a diminished hotspot, but at 1.5x or lower it's a risky proposition.


I really wonder how UST projection fares with that in mind... Maybe because the projector is below the screen the center point between the lens and your eyes is off screen? 
https://www.passionhomecinema.fr/bl...-ecran-technique-vividstorm-lavis-de-gregory/





noob00224 said:


> I haven't tested other ALR's personally, but from the specifications I don't see how the Parallax 0.8 will not have any artifacts.


aha I found it. Behold.https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2640710&d=1573687541

Very similar matte appearance as the studiotek. Never underestimate human ingenuity. The DNP 0885 and Parallax .8 are the same materials. The EVP DS9 is very similar but has slightly more texture.

The low vertical half gain of the these materials is due to the lavours, kind of like a lenticular screen, and it rejects light from above or below.

The Elunevision Aurora ALR is probably similar to the elite cinegray 5d or one of the other alr models. Elunevision doesn't really provide samples... idk... Id stay away from that one.

The Greyhawk just isnt dark enough.


----------



## noob00224

bdht said:


> I'm in the same boat a TV just won't work. The screen comes down in front of a closet. I have a 42" tv on the wall between the door and the closet but that's about all the room there is ;[
> 
> 
> I'm sure there are people in the DIY forum who have low gain screens and very bright projectors. Typically the problem is either sacrificing image quality for light output, or having a very very bright projector to maintain image quality, which comes at the cost of heat output, power consumption, and reduced bulb life. The laser projectors offset those limitations. In any case, a black material is the best option(really the only option as far as image quality is concerned) for high ambient light projection. You can avoid washout and reject light with a fresnel screen but your black is still going to be a light gray.
> 
> Huh... 2500 lumens, 6k hour bulb life, 300w. That should work. 100" .25gain screen would give you 21fl. The only concern is panel degradation with LCD and high light output, keep those filters/air intakes clean!. LCD also has a fairly low pixel fill, inferior mtf, overshoots, etc. etc., so if sports and motion are a concern, DLP is a better choice.
> 
> 
> I really wonder how UST projection fares with that in mind... Maybe because the projector is below the screen the center point between the lens and your eyes is off screen?
> https://www.passionhomecinema.fr/bl...-ecran-technique-vividstorm-lavis-de-gregory/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aha I found it. Behold.https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2640710&d=1573687541
> 
> Very similar matte appearance as the studiotek. Never underestimate human ingenuity. The DNP 0885 and Parallax .8 are the same materials. The EVP DS9 is very similar but has slightly more texture.
> 
> The low vertical half gain of the these materials is due to the lavours, kind of like a lenticular screen, and it rejects light from above or below.
> 
> The Elunevision Aurora ALR is probably similar to the elite cinegray 5d or one of the other alr models. Elunevision doesn't really provide samples... idk... Id stay away from that one.
> 
> The Greyhawk just isnt dark enough.


The HC1060/1040 is cheaper and so are the lamps.

The UST lenticular ALR don't have hotspots, I meant regular throw.

What do you mean by black screens? 0.25 gain?

Just because there is no room for a TV doesn't mean that a projector type setup is plausible.

In some setups (just wall reflections) the Greyhawk could work, I assume.

Usually when it says minimum throw, at that range there are some issues.


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> The HC1060/1040 is cheaper and so are the lamps.


Right I'd be interested to see what kind of image that provides. 



noob00224 said:


> The UST lenticular ALR don't have hotspots, I meant regular throw.


Heh right, but how is that, is there no optical gain layer due to the close proximity of the projector to the screen? 



noob00224 said:


> What do you mean by black screens? 0.25 gain?


Material in a shade of black

paint mixes like:
8oz FolkArt Metallic Sequin Black
8oz Water-based Matte polyurethane
8oz water

front/rear projection materials like these:
https://strongmdi.com/products/blackview/
https://www.gerriets.com/us/optiblack-2-2-front-and-rear-projection-screen
Though these would need a velvet layer directly behind them.

My hope for the future is shades similar to those with rgb laser dlp. I think that would make for a very nice image with high ambient light.



noob00224 said:


> Just because there is no room for a TV doesn't mean that a projector type setup is plausible.


Well... if there isn't space for a tv, but there is space for a retractable screen, then its certainly plausible... within reason and tempering expectations within the realms of physics, you can still have a very nice display. The way technology has evolved just in these last couple of years, there's lots of methods to prevent washout, black levels in ambient light have gotten better, and I don't see that slowing, i.e. we'll be seeing darker materials with brighter projectors, and with micro/nano manufacturing, well see materials like the SSE Ambient-Visionaire Black in retractable format in the future as well.



noob00224 said:


> Usually when it says minimum throw, at that range there are some issues.


Putting the sample up on the screen at 1.4-1.5 throw ratios, no hotspotting, no sparkle, perfectly resolved pixel structure free of any artifacting.


----------



## Run&Gun

bdht said:


> I really wonder how UST projection fares with that in mind... Maybe because the projector is below the screen the center point between the lens and your eyes is off screen?
> https://www.passionhomecinema.fr/bl...-ecran-technique-vividstorm-lavis-de-gregory/





noob00224 said:


> The HC1060/1040 is cheaper and so are the lamps.
> 
> The UST lenticular ALR don't have hotspots, I meant regular throw.


Yep. I can attest to UST screens not hot spotting and being VERY uniform. I have an Elites Screens 120" UST CLR paired with an LG CineBeam and the image, at least to the naked eye, is like looking at a large, quality flat panel. And to someone that didn't know and just walked into the room, that's probably what they may think, since the projector is nestled behind the center channel.

I had a 92" rear projection TV before this and to my understanding, the screen was lenticular as well, but the off-axis viewing with it was pretty bad, compared to this UST front projection system(rptv's were basically UST's hitting a mirror in a fully enclosed cabinet).


----------



## noob00224

bdht said:


> Right I'd be interested to see what kind of image that provides.
> 
> 
> Heh right, but how is that, is there no optical gain layer due to the close proximity of the projector to the screen?
> 
> 
> Material in a shade of black
> 
> paint mixes like:
> 8oz FolkArt Metallic Sequin Black
> 8oz Water-based Matte polyurethane
> 8oz water
> 
> front/rear projection materials like these:
> https://strongmdi.com/products/blackview/
> https://www.gerriets.com/us/optiblack-2-2-front-and-rear-projection-screen
> Though these would need a velvet layer directly behind them.
> 
> My hope for the future is shades similar to those with rgb laser dlp. I think that would make for a very nice image with high ambient light.
> 
> 
> Well... if there isn't space for a tv, but there is space for a retractable screen, then its certainly plausible... within reason and tempering expectations within the realms of physics, you can still have a very nice display. The way technology has evolved just in these last couple of years, there's lots of methods to prevent washout, black levels in ambient light have gotten better, and I don't see that slowing, i.e. we'll be seeing darker materials with brighter projectors, and with micro/nano manufacturing, well see materials like the SSE Ambient-Visionaire Black in retractable format in the future as well.
> 
> 
> Putting the sample up on the screen at 1.4-1.5 throw ratios, no hotspotting, no sparkle, perfectly resolved pixel structure free of any artifacting.


Not knowledgeable enough, but I believe lenticlular UST's don't hotspot because of the way the reflection is being done versus an angular ALR.
There might be a raising of black levels but with the projector being so close and bright (even with a regular screen) this might be already happening. They do work with low gain screens, so that might offset it.

I'd like to be surprised, but I don't see how a projector could match a TV in a medium/high ambient light environment. It might be more then acceptable, but still not TV level.
Until this happens (if ever) TV tech or something else might come along like AR that would make projection based systems obsolete.
A drop down TV like a projector screen would be nice.

Can hotspots be judged just by samples? It may not sparkle, but unless it's tested with an entire screen I don't know if it can be properly evaluated. A picture could be taken with the same in the center and on the edges and compared, but the differences might be due to other factors, like uniformity.

LE:



bdht said:


> I couldn't say for sure as I don't have direct experience with longer throws, and they dont seem to publish mininum throws to avoid any hotspotting. For instance Da-Lite reports the Parallax 0.8 as a minimum recommended throw ratio of 1.5, and I don't see hotspotting, or at least not pronounced hotspotting(i.e. very faint) at 1.4.
> 
> The only way I know of know for sure is to get a sample, put it in place where the screen is or would be, and with the projector on move the sample away from you and see if the light level changes.


----------



## noob00224

bdht said:


> Nope, blue laser yellow phosphur and a color wheel. No rgb laser affordable front projection yet, theres the lg ust, the hisense ust, but after that youre talking large venue projectors.



BenQ LU950 appears to be the same.
How can you tell what type of laser is it?


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> BenQ LU950 appears to be the same.
> How can you tell what type of laser is it?


Find a diagram of the internals? If it doesn't say idk


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> I'd like to be surprised, but I don't see how a projector could match a TV in a medium/high ambient light environment. It might be more then acceptable, but still not TV level.
> Until this happens (if ever) TV tech or something else might come along like AR that would make projection based systems obsolete.


Ya I dont see front projection matching emissive displays at least in terms of black levels/contrast. Rgb dlp still has a superior gamut and also mtf/pixel response, which can be useful for sports or gaming. Id imagine retractable/rollable tvs will hit well before fp could provide comparable contrast though, even with new screen technology and ultra bright projectors.



noob00224 said:


> Can hotspots be judged just by samples? It may not sparkle, but unless it's tested with an entire screen I don't know if it can be properly evaluated. A picture could be taken with the same in the center and on the edges and compared, but the differences might be due to other factors, like uniformity.


Since hotspotting is relative to your eyes and the lens, you can have a sample at your screen location, look at it straight on and move off the side and see the illuminance of the material change.

Once you have an idea of the various materials and their requirements, you can just hit a sample with a flashlight and gauge what the recommended throw ratio would be as its entirely how matte the material is.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

@bdht & @noob00224

Thanks for all your informative replies, it really has been an education if somewhat bewildering. It's amazing the knowledge you guys have...and a shame that the average Joe is never armed with this before making an informed decision - why don't specialist retailers ever give you all the pro's / con's  i'd hate to think of the setup I would have got had i not come across this forum!

Anyway I asked the builder to come back with measurements. Ive included this in the picture attached (so 12'9) wall to screen, not taking into account projector sizing. With regard to setup you can see the windows behind the screen, ceiling unfortunately needs to be white but wall will be a dark green (https://www.littlegreene.com/puck) in order to satisfy the so called "better half". 

Projector choice was again determined by the WAF - Wife Approval Factor - so couldn't be to large which is why I moved away from the Epson TW7400. Im happy to consider other PJs within a reasonable cost but size/noise is a factor unfortunately. I really want the best bang for buck in this first foray into projectors & screens and am hoping once we become accustomed to our setup I can extend quality and capability as technology and funds progress. I would even consider ditching a PJ that allows for sport in high ambient light to allowing for a setup where I can close the window shutters and watch the game under this scenario or alternatively go into the other room with the OLED TV to watch if the pq is that bad in the projector room.

Once again thanks for your continued advice


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> It's a shame that the average Joe is never armed with this before making an informed decision - why don't specialist retailers ever give you all the pro's / con's  i'd hate to think of the setup I would have got had i not come across this forum!


Maybe one day there will be a rtings.com for projection :/



Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Projector choice was again determined by the WAF - Wife Approval Factor - so couldn't be to large which is why I moved away from the Epson TW7400. Im happy to consider other PJs within a reasonable cost but size/noise is a factor unfortunately.


Sometimes WAF adjusts as they get a taste for a projection. Mine was adverse to projection in general at first and now its mandatory that we have a projector and the best image possible aesthetics be damned, so Im building a 2 projector shelf to accomodate two 40-50lb projectors D:



Dhiren Raghvani said:


> I really want the best bang for buck in this first foray into projectors & screens and am hoping once we become accustomed to our setup I can extend quality and capability as technology and funds progress. I would even consider ditching a PJ that allows for sport in high ambient light to allowing for a setup where I can close the window shutters and watch the game under this scenario or alternatively go into the other room with the OLED TV to watch if the pq is that bad in the projector room.


With the lights out these alr screens do a good job of offsetting reflective/small rooms and deep blacks arent as imperative for sports. So the HT3550 and Black Crystal 0.8 are a good fit. There are also plenty of $2-300 used projectors, maybe even new stock older 1080p models that will give you a very similar image quality, do sports broadcast in 4k? Stick to DLP for sports as well, they do motion blur free, better than oled rbe aside. led dlp would be even better but size and cost are an issue.


----------



## noob00224

@Dhiren Raghvani
@bdht 

If the distance from wall to screen is 12.9' (154.8"), with an HT3550 or similar (depth 10.3" + 4" for cables = 14.3"), the available distance would be 140.5‬".
An 120" screen (16:9) has a width of 104.6". This would result in a 1.34x throw ratio. With an 110" it's 1.46x, and with 100" its 1.61x.
Wouldn't the XY BC 0.8 hotspot on the first two sizes at least?

How about using curtains for the windows, lights that don't hit the screen directly, lights that are only present (during viewing time) in the seating area and not the screen area?
A light grey or even white screen could be used.
A light grey screen would benefit from a brighter projector.

Percentage wise, how much will the setup be used for sports than other types of content?

Depending on how much ambient light remains in the room, even a HT3550 could be used here. Other DLP's with RGBRGB color wheels would be Optoma UHD50/51/51A/etc, Viewsonic PX7274K.
For brighter DLP's the Benq TK850, Optoma UHD51ALV/52ALV, ZH403, Viewsonic PX7474K, LS700-4k.

Some people are ok with 3LCD for sports as well. Depending on the percentage of total time dedicated to sports, a 3LCD could be an option. Epson HC3800 paired with a grey, not necessarily light grey screen could work.

The Benq's would be most accurate out of the box, with the Epson HC3800 probably last.
The HT3550, TK850 and HC3800 have active irises that improve black level.


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> Wouldn't the XY BC 0.8 hotspot on the first two sizes at least?


 Ya but any budget material is going to hotspot at that range, and the majority of projectors in this price range have fairly low uniformity as well. 



noob00224 said:


> lights that are only present (during viewing time) in the seating area and not the screen area?


Task lighting is tricky in small rooms, especially reflective ones. Can almost guarantee any lights in the back room will wash the screen out


----------



## noob00224

bdht said:


> Ya but any budget material is going to hotspot at that range, and the majority of projectors in this price range have fairly low uniformity as well.
> 
> 
> Task lighting is tricky in small rooms, especially reflective ones. Can almost guarantee any lights in the back room will wash the screen out


You're in a better position to answer this, wouldn't the 1.34x throw for the 120" screen have a more pronounced hotspot?

Doesn't seem bad for a 200" image on a grey wall.
Personally I would take the ALR since I'm used to the hotspot, but maybe Dhiren Raghvani would make the trade.


----------



## bdht

noob00224 said:


> You're in a better position to answer this, wouldn't the 1.34x throw for the 120" screen have a more pronounced hotspot?


On full white maybe. I think uniformity will look fairly similar but sparkle/sheen becomes more pronounced the closer the projector is. i.e. the screen becomes more visible. I thought hes considering a 100" screen though?


----------



## noob00224

bdht said:


> On full white maybe. I think uniformity will look fairly similar but sparkle/sheen becomes more pronounced the closer the projector is. i.e. the screen becomes more visible. I thought hes considering a 100" screen though?


Not sure what size he's considering. Previously when I talked to users interested in ALR screens they did not like the idea of a hotspot, even in just a white filed.
The ALR is superior in ambient light, but it's up to him if he's ok with a potential hotspot in bright/white images.

It might be similar to these examples, there's some sports ones there:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...e-cinema-projector-review-3.html#post57673262


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

noob00224 said:


> @Dhiren Raghvani
> @bdht
> 
> If the distance from wall to screen is 12.9' (154.8"), with an HT3550 or similar (depth 10.3" + 4" for cables = 14.3"), the available distance would be 140.5‬".
> An 120" screen (16:9) has a width of 104.6". This would result in a 1.34x throw ratio. With an 110" it's 1.46x, and with 100" its 1.61x.
> Wouldn't the XY BC 0.8 hotspot on the first two sizes at least?
> 
> How about using curtains for the windows, lights that don't hit the screen directly, lights that are only present (during viewing time) in the seating area and not the screen area?
> A light grey or even white screen could be used.
> A light grey screen would benefit from a brighter projector.
> 
> Depending on how much ambient light remains in the room, even a HT3550 could be used here. Other DLP's with RGBRGB color wheels would be Optoma UHD50/51/51A/etc, Viewsonic PX7274K.
> For brighter DLP's the Benq TK850, Optoma UHD51ALV/52ALV, ZH403, Viewsonic PX7474K, LS700-4k.
> 
> Some people are ok with 3LCD for sports as well. Depending on the percentage of total time dedicated to sports, a 3LCD could be an option. Epson HC3800 paired with a grey, not necessarily light grey screen could work.
> 
> The Benq's would be most accurate out of the box, with the Epson HC3800 probably last.
> The HT3550, TK850 and HC3800 have active irises that improve black level.


100" is the preferred size, curtains blackout blinds are all things I would consider for the room. 




bdht said:


> On full white maybe. I think uniformity will look fairly similar but sparkle/sheen becomes more pronounced the closer the projector is. i.e. the screen becomes more visible. I thought hes considering a 100" screen though?


Yes 100" was what I was considering as this fits within the space between the bay window walls...



noob00224 said:


> Not sure what size he's considering. Previously when I talked to users interested in ALR screens they did not like the idea of a hotspot, even in just a white filed.
> The ALR is superior in ambient light, but it's up to him if he's ok with a potential hotspot in bright/white images.
> 
> It might be similar to these examples, there's some sports ones there:
> https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...e-cinema-projector-review-3.html#post57673262


Hotspot would bother me if you ask me now...but in reality it would probably depend on how prominent it would be, based on the above are we sure we would hotspot on a 1.61x throw?

Finally if I read this right...HT3550 is probably the best option, the ALR screen would perform better during ambient light times and during the evening when the room would be dark, it would perform better than other screens.

The TK850 is an option but during evening viewing is potentially more prone to hot spotting - however does the hot spotting issue apply on a 100" at the distances above - it would be better in ambient light than the HT3550.

Its always going to be a trade off, just how much is yet to be seen! Once again thanks for your valuable input


----------



## bdht

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Hotspot would bother me if you ask me now...but in reality it would probably depend on how prominent it would be, based on the above are we sure we would hotspot on a 1.61x throw? Finally if I read this right...HT3550 is probably the best option, the ALR screen would perform better during ambient light times and during the evening when the room would be dark, it would perform better than other screens.


The ht3550 has a max throw of 1.47, there will be hotspotting in that room no matter what unless you use a matte material like the studiotek 100 or parallax(3-4k). The low uniformity of the ht3550 will make the uniformity issues more pronounced, as will a screen with lower viewing angles. Use a screen with a wider viewing angle and a projector with a nicer lens and I dont think youll find any uniformity issues to be distracting. Since youre size restricted on the projector as well im not sure what other projectors to suggest, with improved optics comes increased size, except for the smaller led projectors but they typically have lower light output. 

Id say all things considered the ht3550 and the black crystal 0.8 is a good combo.


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> 100" is the preferred size, curtains blackout blinds are all things I would consider for the room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes 100" was what I was considering as this fits within the space between the bay window walls...
> 
> 
> 
> Hotspot would bother me if you ask me now...but in reality it would probably depend on how prominent it would be, based on the above are we sure we would hotspot on a 1.61x throw?
> 
> Finally if I read this right...HT3550 is probably the best option, the ALR screen would perform better during ambient light times and during the evening when the room would be dark, it would perform better than other screens.
> 
> The TK850 is an option but during evening viewing is potentially more prone to hot spotting - however does the hot spotting issue apply on a 100" at the distances above - it would be better in ambient light than the HT3550.
> 
> Its always going to be a trade off, just how much is yet to be seen! Once again thanks for your valuable input


@*bdht* would probably know better, I assume with an 100" screen there might be a slight hotspot in a white background. 
It's probably less prominent than than in those pictures with the Cinegrey 3D and the W2000/HT3050.

The HT3550 has a better picture quality than the TK850. The TK850 can be adjusted with it's brightness low enough to match some of the modes on the HT3550.

Can't be 100% sure, but I believe the HT3550 is bright enough for _some _ambient light in that room.
If you want a projector similar to the HT3550 but brighter and with a RGBRGB color wheel (which the TK850 and 51/52ALV do not have), get the Optoma UHD51/51A.

@Talontsi96 made a comparative review between the two in these posts and others in the thread. I would personally go with the Optoma since it's brighter and sharper.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59072878
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59068214
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59066632


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

noob00224 said:


> @*bdht* would probably know better, I assume with an 100" screen there might be a slight hotspot in a white background.
> It's probably less prominent than than in those pictures with the Cinegrey 3D and the W2000/HT3050.
> 
> The HT3550 has a better picture quality than the TK850. The TK850 can be adjusted with it's brightness low enough to match some of the modes on the HT3550.
> 
> Can't be 100% sure, but I believe the HT3550 is bright enough for _some _ambient light in that room.
> If you want a projector similar to the HT3550 but brighter and with a RGBRGB color wheel (which the TK850 and 51/52ALV do not have), get the Optoma UHD51/51A.
> 
> @Talontsi96 made a comparative review between the two in these posts and others in the thread. I would personally go with the Optoma since it's brighter and sharper.
> https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59072878
> https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59068214
> https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-d...ncement-ownera-s-thread-189.html#post59066632


Thanks both!
@noob00224 I did consider the Optoma, but then forgot about it when I saw the epsom...then post Epsom with the WAF I landed on the Benq and totally forgot about the optoma...long story short, thanks for the reminder. So with the extra brightness would I expect more of a hotspot or have I done you both a disservice and got this the wrong way round?


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks both!
> 
> @*noob00224* I did consider the Optoma, but then forgot about it when I saw the epsom...then post Epsom with the WAF I landed on the Benq and totally forgot about the optoma...long story short, thanks for the reminder. So with the extra brightness would I expect more of a hotspot or have I done you both a disservice and got this the wrong way round?






















Bright preset has a green tint.
Vivid on the Benq has Brilliant Color, which some people don't like since it affects color accuracy.

The Optoma is quieter, even in Bright lamp, and there are less complaints about it. Could be because the Benq is a more popular model.
The Benq does have an iris and a WCG filter, as well as other /minor features.


In regards to the hotspot, the Optoma's brightness can be lowered (via presets or Eco lamp) to that of the Benq with the Reference preset, which is the most accurate. 
I can't say exactly how the hotspot will look like, but on a sports game it will probably not be distracting with Optoma's higher lumen output. If it's too much you can just turn it down.

In a setup like that, personally I'd like to have some extra lumens in case they're needed.


----------



## bdht

The second gen ht3550 improved its output, though phc measurements first measurements were higher than projectorcentrals originally. hmm...

https://www.passionhomecinema.fr/blog/wp-content/uploads/Comparaison-2-modèles-de-BenQ-W2700.jpg


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

Thanks again guys...so much to think about!

As we are in the build stage I need to finalize on a screen and location for the projector - I have a couple of weeks as most of China is on New Years holiday

Projector - I think I need a little more time to decide, Optoma UHD51/60, Benq HT3550 or TK850 (waiting on the reviews for this machine)

Screen - I'm still being led towards the BC 0.8, but am prepared to be swayed with something else from XY if that would be more appropriate

PJ location - Ceiling mount, distance - I've confused myself...should I be sticking to the manufacturer's max distances? @noob00224 mentioned pushing the PJ further back to help with flat spotting - however, everything I've read said stick with the max throw distance


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks again guys...so much to think about!
> 
> As we are in the build stage I need to finalize on a screen and location for the projector - I have a couple of weeks as most of China is on New Years holiday
> 
> Projector - I think I need a little more time to decide, Optoma UHD51/60, Benq HT3550 or TK850 (waiting on the reviews for this machine)
> 
> Screen - I'm still being led towards the BC 0.8, but am prepared to be swayed with something else from XY if that would be more appropriate
> 
> PJ location - Ceiling mount, distance - I've confused myself...should I be sticking to the manufacturer's max distances? @*noob00224* mentioned pushing the PJ further back to help with flat spotting - however, everything I've read said stick with the max throw distance


To reduce the likelihood of the hotspot a projector should be placed as far back as possible. The throw range with an 100" screen is 1.61x. Some projectors don't have this, for instance the Benq HT3550/TK850 go as high as 1.47x, the Optoma UHD51 up to x1.59, UHD60 over 2.0x. 
The TK850 and UHD60 do not have a RGBRGB color wheel, which would be better for color reproduction. The HT3550 and UHD51 are bright enough if some blinds are used, even with some ambient light with that XY BC 0.8 screen. If you're going to pick between these two, then pick on the features, the difference between the throw is small enough not to matter that much.


----------



## praziquantal

I just received a 120 inch PET crystal screen from them. The frame seems high quality, but the screen itself is not uniform and has several areas of streaking that are very noticeable on high brightness images. My installer thinks that it’s uneven application of the ALR coating, possibly even a factory second. 

They have been unwilling to correct the issue. I would recommend against purchasing anything from them.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

noob00224 said:


> To reduce the likelihood of the hotspot a projector should be placed as far back as possible. The throw range with an 100" screen is 1.61x. Some projectors don't have this, for instance the Benq HT3550/TK850 go as high as 1.47x, the Optoma UHD51 up to x1.59, UHD60 over 2.0x.
> The TK850 and UHD60 do not have a RGBRGB color wheel, which would be better for color reproduction. The HT3550 and UHD51 are bright enough if some blinds are used, even with some ambient light with that XY BC 0.8 screen. If you're going to pick between these two, then pick on the features, the difference between the throw is small enough not to matter that much.


Thanks - excuse my ignorance just so I am clear...I would be placing the projector at 1.61x (140.5") - even though the max as per benq is 1.47x (128") and this would reduce hotspotting but not affect picture quality or viewing pleasure?


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

praziquantal said:


> I just received a 120 inch PET crystal screen from them. The frame seems high quality, but the screen itself is not uniform and has several areas of streaking that are very noticeable on high brightness images. My installer thinks that it’s uneven application of the ALR coating, possibly even a factory second.
> 
> They have been unwilling to correct the issue. I would recommend against purchasing anything from them.


Hmmm worrying


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks - excuse my ignorance just so I am clear...I would be placing the projector at 1.61x (140.5") - even though the max as per benq is 1.47x (128") and this would reduce hotspotting but not affect picture quality or viewing pleasure?


You can't place a projector above it's throw range.
The difference between 1.47x on the Benq and 1.59x on the Optoma is not that big, you should decide on the projector's other characteristics.


----------



## Dhiren Raghvani

noob00224 said:


> You can't place a projector above it's throw range.
> The difference between 1.47x on the Benq and 1.59x on the Optoma is not that big, you should decide on the projector's other characteristics.


Thanks got it, so am I right in saying the following -

HT3550 - Lower lumems, requires to be closer to the screen as throw is 1.47x
Optoma - Higher lumens, is a bit further back due to 1.59x throw

Hence hot spotting more likely to occur on Optoma - but it is better for ambient light viewing due to the extra lumens. All caveat-ed with the actual lumen output as referenced by the various measurements provided by yourself and @bdht


----------



## noob00224

Dhiren Raghvani said:


> Thanks got it, so am I right in saying the following -
> 
> HT3550 - Lower lumems, requires to be closer to the screen as throw is 1.47x
> Optoma - Higher lumens, is a bit further back due to 1.59x throw
> 
> Hence hot spotting more likely to occur on Optoma - but it is better for ambient light viewing due to the extra lumens. All caveat-ed with the actual lumen output as referenced by the various measurements provided by yourself and @*bdht*


In regards to hotspoting, the Optomas higher lumens is offset by it being positioned further back.

The Optoma is not that much brighter than the Benq.
The Optoma's brightness can be reduced by using Eco mode to the same brightness as Benq. 

Those measurements were taken with 100% zoom. Using less zoom reduces the brightness. 

For the HT3550:
_*Zoom Lens Light Loss:* 8% _

For the UHD51A
_*Zoom Lens Light Loss.* The 1.3x zoom lens drops brightness by only about 12% in the full telephoto setting._



You have to look at the projector's other features and decide which one to go with.


----------



## Guillaume Fourquet

Hi everyone,

I'm currently configuring my setup and planning to buy an optoma UHZ65UST and and XYscreen 90" pet crystal.

Does anyone know the depth of this screen with the frame ?

Thanky you.

Guillaume


----------



## evanft

So my screen will be arriving soon. Here’s what the process looked like. 

I ordered the screen in September. I was provided a quote of $670 shipped to my door, which I gladly paid. The screen took about a month to arrive in the port in California. 

After the screen arrived, it sat in customs for about a month. Neither I bore XY had a lot of success contacting their forwarder. Eventually the forwarder told XY that the container in which the screen shipped also contained counterfeit goods. Because of this the entire container was being shipped back to China. 

At this point, XY presented me with two options. I could have a new screen made that was small enough to be shipped via DHL. The second option was to ship the screen using a slightly different method that would require me to pick up the screen at my local port. This would allow me to keep my screen size, but it would incur an additional $200 or so in forwarder fees. I was ok with this, so I accepted this option. 

The screen eventually made its way back to China where XY inspected it, repacked it, and handed off to the logistics company for shipping back to the United States. 

This is where the fun begins. 

The XY sales rep informs me I need to complete an ISF form before they can ship the screen. I google this, and learn this can be done online through a broker that charges $95 for the service. I go ahead and fill out the form. Following the submission of the ISF, the broker emails me to inform me that there is also a further $125 for the customs clearance fee. I don’t see this as a big deal since I figured it was part of the ~$200 amount XY quoted me. 

A couple weeks later I get a phone call from the logistics company informing me that the screen will be arriving soon. Great! They then send me a bill of $261 for their services. 

After this, I get notice from the broker that there will be $102 in tariffs needed on the screen, plus another $100 in charges for the customs bond and costs for dealing with the logistics company. 

So for those of you playing the home game, here are the numbers. 

$630 screen cost
$95 ISF fee
$125 customs clearance fee
$261 logistics company fee
$102 customs duty
$100 customs bond and misc fees
$100 oversized freight charge
$100 charge for company that took delivery in MI

So my $630 screen has turned into a $1,513 screen. Given, this is still a good price for an acoustically transparent 115” 2.4:1 electric screen (seriously check prices for the competition), but I wish I had known about how much the whole thing was going to cost when I first agreed to use the alternative shipping method.


----------



## cgott42

Wow, I was just considering purchasing an XYscreen AT 120" screen
Can anyone else chime in as to how much add'l costs to expect on top of the quoted price?


----------



## jmg999

Guillaume Fourquet said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm currently configuring my setup and planning to buy an optoma UHZ65UST and and XYscreen 90" pet crystal.
> 
> Does anyone know the depth of this screen with the frame ?
> 
> Thanky you.
> 
> Guillaume


I have the 120" PET Crystal from XYscreen with the utlra thin frame so somewhat bigger but most likely identical frames. The depth from the wall is 45mm (almost 2"). The frame width on front is 12mm (almost 1/2"). Very good choice if you can block/reduce direct/indirect sunlight. Great at night, good even with the lamps on but washed out dark scenes during daylight.


----------



## jmg999

cgott42 said:


> Wow, I was just considering purchasing an XYscreen AT 120" screen
> Can anyone else chime in as to how much add'l costs to expect on top of the quoted price?



I don't have paypal so bought mine through Alibaba and had it shipped to Sweden without customs issues.
$1000 screen (120" PET Crystal with ultra thin frame)
$150 shipping
$40 Credit card fee on Alibaba
$295 Swedish customs (25% VAT based on screen&shipping + a customs handling fee)

1485USD (14400SEK) all in all but then again we have crazy 25% VAT (sales tax) in Sweden.


----------



## Guillaume Fourquet

jmg999 said:


> I have the 120" PET Crystal from XYscreen with the utlra thin frame so somewhat bigger but most likely identical frames. The depth from the wall is 45mm (almost 2"). The frame width on front is 12mm (almost 1/2"). Very good choice if you can block/reduce direct/indirect sunlight. Great at night, good even with the lamps on but washed out dark scenes during daylight.


Thank you for your reply


----------



## evanft

cgott42 said:


> Wow, I was just considering purchasing an XYscreen AT 120" screen
> Can anyone else chime in as to how much add'l costs to expect on top of the quoted price?


I updated my post. I needed to pay another $100 for oversized cargo.

And I still haven't received my screen.


----------



## jmg999

Guillaume Fourquet said:


> Thank you for your reply



My bad, the frame depth is actually only 40mm but hanging out 45mm from the wall. Possibly due to my walls even though new.


----------



## evanft

The long national nightmare is over. My screen has arrived.

Initial impressions are very good. 

Everything appears to have been built to my specifications

The motor is dramatically quieter and faster than the Elite screen I already have

The included mounting hardware is really impressive. Super easy to get it installed.

The remote is simple but very nice

Really wish the housing was black. I'll be covering it in black felt tape.


----------



## armyplace

evanft said:


> The long national nightmare is over. My screen has arrived.
> 
> Initial impressions are very good.
> 
> Everything appears to have been built to my specifications
> 
> The motor is dramatically quieter and faster than the Elite screen I already have
> 
> The included mounting hardware is really impressive. Super easy to get it installed.
> 
> The remote is simple but very nice
> 
> Really wish the housing was black. I'll be covering it in black felt tape.


That's great to hear you are happy with the screen in the end after all those unexpected costs!

Which fabric did you choose for your 115" screen?

I've been quoted a 1.8gain screen - WF1 Pro Max 4K for a totally light controlled room.


----------



## Ethan1995

Which screen is more prone to shimmering and Hotspots Cinegrey 3d or Xy black crystal?


----------



## evanft

armyplace said:


> That's great to hear you are happy with the screen in the end after all those unexpected costs!
> 
> Which fabric did you choose for your 115" screen?
> 
> I've been quoted a 1.8gain screen - WF1 Pro Max 4K for a totally light controlled room.


I went with Soundmax 4k.

Screen has been installed. I can't say enough about XY's mounting design. Here are a few quick tips:


The hooks included with the mounting brackets have very in the way of adjustability. Replace them with 2" eye bolts to gain a little bit of adjustment.
The included IR adapter seems to be too big for the hole in the side of the unit. An extension cable with a small male end fixed this problem.
The XY screen does not appear to be in the Harmony database. I added a random screen that was and then overwrote the up/down commands with the ones from the XY remote.
There's no included way to attach the IR sensor, so I just stuck it on using a piece of 3M VHB tape
The 12V trigger input appears to be a 2.5 mm jack. Very strange.
Black felt tape did a great job in making the housing black.


----------



## davorn34

Has anyone had any problems with xy screens. I just got mine setup yesturday and it has like a smudge on it or like a dirty spot that cant be washed off


----------



## davorn34

Has anyone had any problems with xy screens as my screen came with smudges or dirty lines and the top half of my screen is darker then the bottom. Ill send some pics


----------



## noob00224

davorn34 said:


> Has anyone had any problems with xy screens as my screen came with smudges or dirty lines and the top half of my screen is darker then the bottom. Ill send some pics


Those are some bad pictures. There seem to be some vertical lines.

Do not try to clean the screen.

Can you try moving the projector slightly to see if the issue is with the screen or the projector? Or put a white paper where the smudge is.

Take a picture of the screen with a white image projection.


What is the projector, how far away is it, and at what height?
What is the top or bottom height of the screen, and what diagonal?


----------



## augiedoggy

davorn34 said:


> Has anyone had any problems with xy screens as my screen came with smudges or dirty lines and the top half of my screen is darker then the bottom. Ill send some pics


Is the top half consistently darker even when your eyes are looking from near the projector lens? this could be from mounting angle vs viewing angle. the smudge looks like a crease but if not could be a defect in the coating.


----------



## daveb975

evanft said:


> I went with Soundmax 4k.
> 
> Screen has been installed. I can't say enough about XY's mounting design. Here are a few quick tips:
> 
> 
> The hooks included with the mounting brackets have very in the way of adjustability. Replace them with 2" eye bolts to gain a little bit of adjustment.
> The included IR adapter seems to be too big for the hole in the side of the unit. An extension cable with a small male end fixed this problem.
> The XY screen does not appear to be in the Harmony database. I added a random screen that was and then overwrote the up/down commands with the ones from the XY remote.
> There's no included way to attach the IR sensor, so I just stuck it on using a piece of 3M VHB tape
> The 12V trigger input appears to be a 2.5 mm jack. Very strange.
> Black felt tape did a great job in making the housing black.


Definitely agree on the mounting design, it was much easier than I was expecting to get it on the ceiling.

I still haven't got mine set up for IR control yet. Mine was sent with an RF remote only by mistake. 

Could you advise if the IR adaptor is proprietary or if I could just use a standard IR receiver? I'm using a Harmony as well. Is there any way that you'd be able to share the commands that you are using? I'm not even sure if that is possible!


----------



## evanft

daveb975 said:


> Definitely agree on the mounting design, it was much easier than I was expecting to get it on the ceiling.
> 
> I still haven't got mine set up for IR control yet. Mine was sent with an RF remote only by mistake.
> 
> Could you advise if the IR adaptor is proprietary or if I could just use a standard IR receiver? I'm using a Harmony as well. Is there any way that you'd be able to share the commands that you are using? I'm not even sure if that is possible!


It looks like a generic IR receiver using a 3.5 mm jack. You may be able to program a remote to the screen after getting an IR adapter. I'm not sure.


----------



## Dan5

So I have ordered an XY Screen.
I went with the HK80C frame which is regular fixed frame. Gone with 16:9 with 140in Diag.
For material I went with the SoundMax 4k as I intend to mount speaker behind the screen.

It occurred to me that given the size of the screen is their going to be a metal support strut right in the middle and if so will that be a problem if I put a speaker being it or should I offset the center speaker.

Would be curious to hear from anyone who has a HK80C 140in 16:9 frame as to whether theirs has any support struts, and if they got in the way.

Thanks

Dan


----------



## Pehu

Dan5 said:


> So I have ordered an XY Screen.
> I went with the HK80C frame which is regular fixed frame. Gone with 16:9 with 140in Diag.
> For material I went with the SoundMax 4k as I intend to mount speaker behind the screen.
> 
> It occurred to me that given the size of the screen is their going to be a metal support strut right in the middle and if so will that be a problem if I put a speaker being it or should I offset the center speaker.
> 
> Would be curious to hear from anyone who has a HK80C 140in 16:9 frame as to whether theirs has any support struts, and if they got in the way.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Dan


I think there are actually two metal support struts (in 140inch screen size), so there is space between them to fit a center speaker.


----------



## Dan5

Pehu said:


> I think there are actually two metal support struts (in 140inch screen size), so there is space between them to fit a center speaker.


That would be perfect if that is the case.
Thanks for replying

Dan


----------



## tommarra

Pehu said:


> I think there are actually two metal support struts (in 140inch screen size), so there is space between them to fit a center speaker.



Agree there is no strut in the center


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ander77

Hello,

I am thinking of buying an XY ALR screen. My question is whether to buy the Black Crystak 0.8 or the High Gain 2.0.

Project in a living room with white walls and ceiling, the screen size is 98 inches, and the projector used is the ACER VL7860.

As the projector is quite bright, they are recommending the 0.8 screen, but I am left wondering if the HG 2.0 would not be better, not to lose spectacularity in HDR.

Thank you very much!


----------



## bdht

ander77 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am thinking of buying an XY ALR screen. My question is whether to buy the Black Crystak 0.8 or the High Gain 2.0.
> 
> Project in a living room with white walls and ceiling, the screen size is 98 inches, and the projector used is the ACER VL7860.
> 
> As the projector is quite bright, they are recommending the 0.8 screen, but I am left wondering if the HG 2.0 would not be better, not to lose spectacularity in HDR.
> 
> Thank you very much!


The high gain material will have more pronounced gain artifacting, sparkle/sheen, lower viewing angles/half gain, more pronounced hotspotting.


----------



## ander77

Hello,

Has anyone had a chance to compare XY's black crystal to Carl's Place's ALR screens?

Regards


----------



## noob00224

ander77 said:


> Hello,
> 
> Has anyone had a chance to compare XY's black crystal to Carl's Place's ALR screens?
> 
> Regards


I don't think Carl makes electric screens. As far as I know Carl's ALRs have not been measured for gain and half gain. It's said to be similar to the Cinegrey 5D, which has an actual gain of 1.0 and a half gain of 40 degrees.

XY BC 0.8 is 0.8 gain and 80 degrees half gain.

It depends on your setup. Color of walls, distance from projector to screen, source and intensity of ambient light, viewing angle, matter in choosing an ALR screen.


----------



## ander77

Hi,

I am currently projecting on a white wall, with a 98-inch diagonal image.

The room is totally white, and by day I have no ambient light control (I can lower blinds but some light still comes in).

My projector is an ACER vl7860, at a distance from the screen of about 3 meters.

Regarding the angle of view, the viewer furthest from the axis of the center of the screen, is at a distance from the axis of the center of 120 cms.

If I bought ALR I would build a fixed screen.

Thank you!


----------



## noob00224

ander77 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am currently projecting on a white wall, with a 98-inch diagonal image.
> 
> The room is totally white, and by day I have no ambient light control (I can lower blinds but some light still comes in).
> 
> My projector is an ACER vl7860, at a distance from the screen of about 3 meters.
> 
> Regarding the angle of view, the viewer furthest from the axis of the center of the screen, is at a distance from the axis of the center of 120 cms.
> 
> If I bought ALR I would build a fixed screen.
> 
> Thank you!


But at what angle will be the furthest viewing angle from the central axis?

With a screen that size and that distance the throw ratio is ~1.38x. This is under the recommended throw for a lot of ALR screens, so if you want to get a screen get one with wide viewing angle. 

There will be a hotspot and sparkle, but it's subjective if you're going to be bothered or not.

This is a Cinegrey 5D with a 1.35x throw ratio:






And a DES Pulsar 1.2 with a 1.35x throw ratio as:


----------



## ander77

noob00224 said:


> But at what angle will be the furthest viewing angle from the central axis?
> 
> With a screen that size and that distance the throw ratio is ~1.38x. This is under the recommended throw for a lot of ALR screens, so if you want to get a screen get one with wide viewing angle.
> 
> There will be a hotspot and sparkle, but it's subjective if you're going to be bothered or not.
> 
> This is a Cinegrey 5D with a 1.35x throw ratio:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a DES Pulsar 1.2 with a 1.35x throw ratio as:



Maybe i am wrong, but i thought that witch my configuration, thw throw ratio was 1,6x.

If i use the projector calculator, it says this is the throw ratio:











Or maybe the zoom range is not the same that the throw ratio??

Thanks!!


----------



## noob00224

ander77 said:


> Maybe i am wrong, but i thought that witch my configuration, thw throw ratio was 1,6x.
> 
> If i use the projector calculator, it says this is the throw ratio:
> 
> View attachment 3028882
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe the zoom range is not the same that the throw ratio??
> 
> Thanks!!


That's not the throw ratio, that's the amount of zoom being used. 
This unit has a minimum throw ratio of 1.39x as it says in that page. So if it's placed closest to the screen, that's the lowest throw ratio.

You can calculate manually by dividing distance from projector (lens) to screen/projection surface to the width of the screen.





Screen Size Calculator


This calculator helps converting the size and dimension of a screen (in cm and inches) into each other.




screen-size.info





So a 98" diagonal screen has a width of 217 cm.
300 / 217 = 1.38


----------



## ander77

Thanks a lot for your explication!

Then i suppose that the only ALR's screens i can mount are ones with negative gain, like XY Black Crsytal or Vividstorm Obsydian, with an angle of vision of 160 degrees.


----------



## noob00224

ander77 said:


> Thanks a lot for your explication!
> 
> Then i suppose that the only ALR's screens i can mount are ones with negative gain, like XY Black Crsytal or Vividstorm Obsydian, with an angle of vision of 160 degrees.


Those would have a better performance than models with lower half gain. But here are ALR screens with negative gain that have low half gain. So having lower gain is not enough.

There is another option, paint mixes with ALR properties. Can be applied on a smooth wall or a cheap white screen. Cheaper. Can be configured to your setup. This would be the best option.


----------



## ander77

noob00224 said:


> Those would have a better performance than models with lower half gain. But here are ALR screens with negative gain that have low half gain. So having lower gain is not enough.
> 
> There is another option, paint mixes with ALR properties. Can be applied on a smooth wall or a cheap white screen. Cheaper. Can be configured to your setup. This would be the best option.


I have read about this paints, but honestly, i thought that the results were poor. Now, if you tell that have better results than screens, i will investigat about it. Of course, if you would like to tell me something else about these paints, i would appreciate a lot!


----------



## noob00224

ander77 said:


> I have read about this paints, but honestly, i thought that the results were poor. Now, if you tell that have better results than screens, i will investigat about it. Of course, if you would like to tell me something else about these paints, i would appreciate a lot!


Results can be better than an ALR screen.
The best way to get started is to create a new thread here:








DIY Screen Section







www.avsforum.com


----------



## cardoski

Was really interested in the Soundmax 4k until I noticed a 3m width limit? Very odd and disappointing.


----------



## Natar

Good day! Please advise which screen to order for the Optoma UHZ65LV projector.Room with light walls and large windows with blinds. Ceiling mount of the projector at a distance of 5.5 meters from the screen, the distance from the screen to the viewer is 4.5 meters. The screen diagonal will be 160 '. Does the Black crystal 0.8 screen support 4k resolution? or better white screen WF1 pro max 4k?


----------



## bdht

china-hotpot said:


> As i know ,this fabric already stop to sell and production on they company


Thank you. I use the Black Crystal 0.8 gain. I'm finding that with very bright projectors, I could use an even darker shade of grey or light shade of black, like Gerriets Optiblack 2.2. Is there any plan for a blacker front projection material? For instance, the Xiaomi Mijia ALPD3.0 at 2000 lumens on a 90" screen. Even at 0.2 gain thats 17fl / 60 nits. The shade of black would maintain contrast and the low gain would reject alot of ambient light.






OPTIBLACK 2.2 Rear Projection Screen - Gerriets


<h3>The Disappearing Screen!</h3> <p>Introducing our newly formulated OPTIBLACK projection screen, manufactured for superior diffusion and a production width of<br />220 cm (86”). </p> <p>Due to its ideal luminance distribution, OP




www.gerriets.com


----------



## noob00224

china-hotpot said:


> All of this 3 fabirc are ALR screen for UST projector ,but XYScreen Fresenl is hard screen ,means the fabric + frame is together and it can't Separate and you don't need to installation the screen by yourself ,but the package is very big and package weight is heave so shipping cost is expensive .
> PET Crystal and PET Grid are both detachable screen,you need to installation the screen by yourself when you receive it .
> PET Crystal have better ambient light rejecting ability than PET Grid ,so price is also higher .
> here is the video from they sales--Wendy Chou,to explain what's the different between PET Crystal and PET Grid :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> size:
> Fresnel hard screen : 16:9,100inch
> PET Crystal ,standard size:16:9,80",90",100",120" . can customized size from 80"-120" ,biggest size is 120"
> PET Grid size :80"-200", can customized many different size.
> 
> summary :the best choice is PET Crystal


Thank you for your answer.

I'm no screen design expert, but I would have thought the Grid might do a better job since it would have rejection properties from the square shaped design. So if the top and bottom is parallel to the ground, the sides would be vertical, which might have provide better ambient light rejection from the side?

In many cases, ceiling light can be controlled, the issue is lateral light, from windows and such.


----------



## noah katz

@china-hotpot 

Does XY Screen make ALR screens for normal throw?

If not, do you plan to in the future?

I use 2:1 throw ratio.

Thanks


----------



## bdht

noah katz said:


> @china-hotpot
> 
> Does XY Screen make ALR screens for normal throw?
> 
> If not, do you plan to in the future?
> 
> I use 2:1 throw ratio.
> 
> Thanks


Yes, I use their Black Crystal 0.8. And I believe they have a high gain version as well.


----------



## Rise Against

Questions for those of you who have purchased an XY screen.

Did you purchase through Alibaba or direct from XY? Which would be the better way to go in your opinion?

For those who bought motorized screens, how well has it held up for screen flatness, motor operation?

I've asked an XY rep a couple times what the backing material/color on the back of the Black Crystal 0.8 motorized screen is and received a couple answers and many pictures, but nothing that actually answers the question. No knock, as I don't write/speak Mandarin, but can anyone who has bought one lately tell me. I'm curious if it has a black backing or if that's special order, but as I said, I haven't been able to get an answer.

@bdht I believe you've had one for quite a while, has it held up well?


----------



## bdht

started in alibaba then moved to emails, email and paypal worked fine for me

Ive had no issues with the screen so far, motors fine, tensionings fine havent made any adjustments, had it for... a year and a half?

it has a black backing, no light shines through to the rear and i have to put my phones flashlight right up to the rear of the screen to see light on the viewing side.


----------



## wertman

XY seems I just got a JVC lx NZ3 projector 3000 lumen. looking for a 120 inch screen the projector will be mounted about 12.5 feet from screen. That the full distance of the room. It is a upstairs loft 4 windows but we have blinds so not totally dark. will mostly be watching at night but some use during the day. Looking at getting Black crystal 120 inch .8 gain. Thought about going bigger but don't believe the JVC can throw a large image at that short of a distance. what is everyones thoughts?


----------



## noob00224

wertman said:


> XY seems I just got a JVC lx NZ3 projector 3000 lumen. looking for a 120 inch screen the projector will be mounted about 12.5 feet from screen. That the full distance of the room. It is a upstairs loft 4 windows but we have blinds so not totally dark. will mostly be watching at night but some use during the day. Looking at getting Black crystal 120 inch .8 gain. Thought about going bigger but don't believe the JVC can throw a large image at that short of a distance. what is everyones thoughts?


That model is not 3000 lumens. When measured the white lumens are measured, they are white lumens. On this model color lumens are less than white lumens.





JVC LX-NZ3 4K Laser DLP Projector Review – Performance - Projector Reviews


[...]Read More...




www.projectorreviews.com





Minimum throw is 1.35 which is under the recommended throw ratio for these ALRs.








JVC LX-NZ3B Projection Calculator - Throw Distance and Screen Size


Find screen size and throw distance for the JVC LX-NZ3B projector.



www.projectorcentral.com





So there will be a hotspot and sparkle in bright scenes.

With angular ARLs there must be no light from the same direction as the projector.

It's unclear how much ambient light there is. If there anything other than a small amount, dark parts of the image will be severely affected.

This model does not have good contrast/blacks. 
I don't know why you choose this one.

Instead of the JVC better get a shorter throw unit.
HT3550 with a white screen will do well in the dark, but not with ambient light.
TK850 or Optoma UHD52ALV is brighter but has poorer blacks than the HT3550.
Getting one of these last two with a grey screen might help, but not a lot.

For a brighter and with shorter throw the LK953ST, but more expensive.

For these kinds of short throws there are no ALR screens.
The only option is paint mixes.

Regardless of screen, controlling ambient light will help. No light should hit the screen directly. Recessed lights, treated room.


----------



## wertman

@noob00224 i now have more questions than answers. I moved this to a separate thread. You can see the lighting in he blinds will help but not completely. I’m not sure why I chose this projector i guess all in for the projector, speakers, screen, and receiver is top end 8k that includes a company to install. If you have other recommendations I would love to hear them. Room is 14x18


----------



## mboyenko

What is the minimum throw distance for XY's Black Crystal and Black Crystal High Gain screens?


----------



## noob00224

mboyenko said:


> What is the minimum throw distance for XY's Black Crystal and Black Crystal High Gain screens?


Depends on the projector. For the 0.8 gain there will be some artifacts at 1.5x, but largely acceptable. For the 2.0, probably 2.0x or more.


----------



## mboyenko

noob00224 said:


> Depends on the projector. For the 0.8 gain there will be some artifacts at 1.5x, but largely acceptable. For the 2.0, probably 2.0x or more.


With a Sony VPL-VW295ES, would the aforementioned throw ratios change at all?


----------



## noob00224

mboyenko said:


> With a Sony VPL-VW295ES, would the aforementioned throw ratios change at all?


These projectors have great picture quality, the best solution is to treat the room properly and get a white screen.

It's really subjective how bothered by artifacts you'll be at 1.5x with a 0.8 model.


----------



## mboyenko

noob00224 said:


> These projectors have great picture quality, the best solution is to treat the room properly and get a white screen.
> 
> It's really subjective how bothered by artifacts you'll be at 1.5x with a 0.8 model.


Unfortunately, the walls of the room are white and it won't be easy to change that since it's a new build and the wife was very set on having white walls. My throw ratios are 1.89 for a 120" screen and 1.68 for a 135" screen as the projector lens is 16.5' from the screen. Based on this, which one would you recommend? XY Black Crystal or Black Crystal High Gain? Do you think I could get away with the high gain or would the hot-spotting/sparkling be too much? It would be nice to get the extra brightness out of the setup if possible (like to have a bit of light on for gaming and sports).


----------



## noob00224

mboyenko said:


> Unfortunately, the walls of the room are white and it won't be easy to change that since it's a new build and the wife was very set on having white walls. My throw ratios are 1.89 for a 120" screen and 1.68 for a 135" screen as the projector lens is 16.5' from the screen. Based on this, which one would you recommend? XY Black Crystal or Black Crystal High Gain? Do you think I could get away with the high gain or would the hot-spotting/sparkling be too much? It would be nice to get the extra brightness out of the setup if possible (like to have a bit of light on for gaming and sports).


Not with the 2.0 gain.

A few ALR screens have less artifacting even at 1.5x, but are very expensive. 
What is the budget?

A better option here would be paint mixes. Can be applied on a white screen or wall.


----------



## noah katz

mboyenko said:


> Do you think I could get away with the high gain or would the hot-spotting/sparkling be too much?


Something to note is that the higher the gain, the less the deleterious effect of the white walls.


----------



## Houy86

Hello Folks,

reading this topic for quite a while but I can't find a real conclusion or summary about this. It makes it very hard if you're not totally into this stuff.
I have the Optoma HD29He Beamer and would love to hear some opinions in combination with the "Sound Max 4K" and "HG Crystal Black".

Usage of this combination would be 80% Movie and 20 % Documentation/Games. Walls are White at the moment. Also when playing games, I prefer
to have some indirect light coming from the windows.
What would you suggest? I also read that the sound dampening isn't a problem at all, even if the HG Crystal Black or non-acoustic from other manufacturers is used.
The Dali Spektor 5.1 Combo with a Klipsch SPL-120SW shall not have a problem with it?
I don't see anyone speaking about 3d capability? There is non with these 2? If not can you suggest one from x0yscreen?

I would suggest that some of you guys could write a conclusion topic about the comparisons and suggestions, even if it's not about 100% perfect because testing isn't done in the same way or in the same environment.


----------



## rfbrang

Anyone using the AT models with a Epson 5050UB, or JVC NX5 or NX7? Looking for a slight gain gain screen to help make 150"ish screen work. If I could go 165" I would.

Last setup was a 138" white over silver spandex screen (.8-ish gain)with a Benq W1070. Still have the Benq but would like a larger screen with better blacks and color in our new dedicated theatre.


----------



## greatfoxmusic

Anyone actually have the SoundMax5 HG 1.8 gain screen? I'm trying to determine if it looks fine or has hot spotting/bad deviation off-center. I have a 200" 2.35:1 screen presently but only 1.0 gain, and my 5050UB can't handle it.


----------



## sathyakamaraj

Did you guys find any local purchase for XY Screens ? Looks like its still going through Alibaba...shipping cost is crazy for 200" Soundmax 5g - Electric is few $100 more...


----------



## Pulse1

Came across a screen that looks identical to XY thinframe HD Sound Max 4k. DELUXX Soundvision has a 12mm thin frame and the same 1.1 gain woven acoustic cloth from Germany. Wonder if there made in the same factory?


----------



## Cremer Lee

Pulse1 said:


> Came across a screen that looks identical to XY thinframe HD Sound Max 4k. DELUXX Soundvision has a 12mm thin frame and the same 1.1 gain woven acoustic cloth from Germany. Wonder if there made in the same factory?


hi , here some more details of the Sound Max 4K for your reference:High Quality 4k Woven Acoustically Transparent Fabric Factory


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> Thank you. I use the Black Crystal 0.8 gain. I'm finding that with very bright projectors, I could use an even darker shade of grey or light shade of black, like Gerriets Optiblack 2.2. Is there any plan for a blacker front projection material? For instance, the Xiaomi Mijia ALPD3.0 at 2000 lumens on a 90" screen. Even at 0.2 gain thats 17fl / 60 nits. The shade of black would maintain contrast and the low gain would reject alot of ambient light.


120" black crystal 0.8 and very unhappy with result, washed out colors and the picture is too dark (this was mentioned numerous times on this forum already). The projector is Xiaomi alpd 3.0 2400 ANSI. There is some videos of this projector with 0.8 vividstorm obsidian screen on YouTube, someone said earlier in this topic that vividstorm 0.8 and XY BC 0.8 are same. NOPE. Vividstorm clearly better.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> 120" black crystal 0.8 and very unhappy with result, washed out colors and the picture is too dark (this was mentioned numerous times on this forum already). The projector is Xiaomi alpd 3.0 2400 ANSI. There is some videos of this projector with 0.8 vividstorm obsidian screen on YouTube, someone said earlier in this topic that vividstorm 0.8 and XY BC 0.8 are same. NOPE. Vividstorm clearly better.


100 nits is too dark?

Do you have a sample of the vividstorm I havent seen it

The xiaomi is only 1,000:1 contrast also, are your observations the same with different materials?


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> Do you have a sample of the vividstorm I havent seen it


I don't. As i said earlier, there is videos of it with same projector on YouTube and colors are way better. I've seen lots of positive feedback for Xiaomi alpd 3 + vividstorm alr 0.8, decided to get alr screen myself and went for BC 0.8 because i thought it would be same.



bdht said:


> The xiaomi is only 1,000:1 contrast also, are your observations the same with different materials?


I have grayish wallpapers and white ceiling, the results are great when I project on them.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> As i said earlier, there is videos of it with same projector on YouTube and colors are way better


Can't really go off a YouTube video. I'll see if I can get a sample and compare



Harpoonz said:


> have grayish wallpapers and white ceiling, the results are great when I project on them


Better than the xy bc?

This is a Mico 40 through an hdssw065 at less than 50nits on the xy bc 0.8, and the photos are inferior to the actual projected image. Uhd blu rays + madvr


----------



## bdht

@Harpoonz can you share your projector settings? What video source/material are you using?


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> @Harpoonz can you share your projector settings?


Brightness 46
Contrast 80
Saturation 65
Sharpness 30
Hue 54
Red 1130
Green 1012
Blue 950



bdht said:


> What video source/material are you using?


Streaming 4k HEVC. 

Colors from this one are similar to what i see on the screen, only more darker. I barely could see the face reflected on the door.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> Brightness 46
> Contrast 80
> Saturation 65
> Sharpness 30
> Hue 54
> Red 1130
> Green 1012
> Blue 950


Were these default settings or did you change them? What are the defaults? Did you use a meter or clipping patterns?

Maybe PM me 

i ordered a vividstorm sample so i can make a comparison when it arrives, also have samples coming from sunscreen oOOoo


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> Colors from this one are similar to what i see on the screen, only more darker. I barely could see the face reflected on the door.


If the light output figures for the xiaomi are correct it should be 4x as bright as the projector I'm using and on your screen size its 2maybe3x the illuminance im seeing, so I cant imagine there should be an issue with the screen material in terms of brightness. Sounds more like projector settings


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> Were these default settings or did you change them? What are the defaults? Did you use a meter or clipping patterns?


These are recommended settings for 0.8 screens for my projector. By default everything is 50.



bdht said:


> If the light output figures for the xiaomi are correct it should be 4x as bright as the projector I'm using and on your screen size its 2maybe3x the illuminance im seeing, so I cant imagine there should be an issue with the screen material in terms of brightness. Sounds more like projector settings


There is nothing in projector settings that can fix this darkness, i tried everything. Then i went to google, searched "black crystal is too dark" and found posts about this issue on this forum and on YouTube comments as well.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> These are recommended settings for 0.8 screens for my projector. By default everything is 50.


look at these side by side though, those settings are not correct. Same screen.











Harpoonz said:


> There is nothing in projector settings that can fix this darkness, i tried everything. Then i went to google, searched "black crystal is too dark" and found posts about this issue on this forum and on YouTube comments as well


it could be the brightness setting is too low, the color space/video range is incorrect(though it doesnt look like it). the white balance is very obviously off. simply being "too dark" at 30fl/100nits doesnt make sense. more likely the incorrect brightness setting and white balance are impacting your perception of the image. 2000 lumens on a 120" 0.60-0.65 gain(the actual measure gain of the black crystal0.8) screen should still be very bright...

after settings colorspace/video range, set brightness/contrast with the clipping patterns. Turn brightness up/down until you can see 17-18 flashing, and contrast for 233-234. setting white balance by eye isnt the easiest thing and correcting hue/saturation without a meter is right out.

brightness:





contrast:





set saturation back at 50, sharpness... idk you can leave it or set it at 0, and put rgb and hue back at their defaults. It's rare that you can use the same color settings as other displays as they're unique corrections to that specific unit.


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> look at these side by side though, those settings are not correct. Same screen.


I have same colors on a phone and notebook, so i don't think that my colors are off?
Phone screenshot:











I did everything you said, saturation at 50, sharpness 40, rgb and hue are default, calibrated brightness/contrast. Picture is still way too dark and colors are dull. Thanks, though.

Bought lux meter today:
Avg lux: 364
Projected area: 3,78m²
364*3.78 is a 1375 lumens

You said xyscreen 0.8 is actually 0.6? 825 lumens then. Are my calculation correct?
Also are you sure you have BC 0.8 and not their BC 2.0 gain version?  I have no idea how you can get that level of brightness with 800 lumens.

EDIT: Updated my calculation results. I made a mistake.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> I have same colors on a phone and notebook, so i don't think that my colors are off?
> Phone screenshot:
> 
> View attachment 3089983
> 
> 
> 
> I did everything you said, saturation at 50, sharpness 40, rgb and hue are default, calibrated brightness/contrast. Picture is still way too dark and colors are dull. Thanks, though.
> 
> Bought lux meter today:
> Avg lux: 364
> Projected area: 3,78m²
> 364*3.78 is a 1375 lumens
> 
> You said xyscreen 0.8 is actually 0.6? 825 lumens then. Are my calculation correct?
> Also are you sure you have BC 0.8 and not their BC 2.0 gain version?  I have no idea how you can get that level of brightness with 800 lumens.
> 
> EDIT: Updated my calculation results. I made a mistake.


hmm... sorry for the round about way of doin this but just to hit a few metrics. 364 lux / 3.14 = 116 nits. 116nits = 34fl. at 120" that would be 1450 lumens, and on a 0.60 - 0.65 gain screen would be 20-22fl / 70-75nits. 

this review reported ~2000 lumens. Also shows great green saturation but poor red saturation. but even at 1300-1400 lumens that should still be nice and bright.


https://www.passionhomecinema.fr/blog/index.php/10/10/2020/test-xiaomi-mijia-alpd3-0-lavis-de-gregory/



Yes I'm positive I have the black crystal 0.8. The phone photo shouldnt be construed as actual brightness as whatever display you're looking at the photo on determines the brightness xD however, there are areas where you can see information is crushed. 








Does the projector have video range / color space / lamp power settings?



Harpoonz said:


> I have same colors on a phone and notebook, so i don't think that my colors are off?


this is a 3d lut calibrated display running madvr for uhd blu ray playback. you could grade a dci master on it, it's accurate.


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> Does the projector have video range / color space / lamp power settings?


No video range / color space / lamp power settings.

All i have is "backlight settings" with two options "movie" and" office" and display parameters:









Colors: Standard, Warm, Cold.
Dynamic contrast on\off, dynamic colors on\off in "advanced settings".




bdht said:


> 116nits = 34fl. at 120" that would be 1450 lumens, and on a 0.60 - 0.65 gain screen would be 20-22fl / 70-75nits.





bdht said:


> but even at 1300-1400 lumens that should still be nice and bright.


And since it's not nice and bright as it should be, does it means i have defective screen? Also why BC screen is 0.6-0.65 gain and not 0.8?

BC description:
There is a layer of crystal in the middle of the surface, which effectively improve the brightness and make the Gain up to 0.8 times.


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> And since it's not nice and bright as it should be, does it means i have defective screen? Also why BC screen is 0.6-0.65 gain and not 0.8?
> 
> BC description:
> There is a layer of crystal in the middle of the surface, which effectively improve the brightness and make the Gain up to 0.8 times.


its typical for screens to not measure the rated gain, kind of like display contrast figures -.- can also factor in the lower half gain and/or hotspotting, as a less uniform image is less bright. how far away is the projector from the screen? just curious

it doesnt sound like the screens defective though, can i see the advanced settings to see what you have selected, are you using movie/office? dynamic contrast or color?

What's your source? firetv, roku, etc.


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> how far away is the projector from the screen? just curious


3.35m



bdht said:


> can i see the advanced settings to see what you have selected, are you using movie/office? dynamic contrast or color?


Both dynamic contrast and colors are enabled by default. Disabling them does not affect brightness. I'm using "office" since it's slightly brighter.



bdht said:


> What's your source? firetv, roku, etc.


No external sources, i'm using streaming service apps since it's Android. Just for test i connected Mecool Android TV box via HDMI to a projector and results are same. Played some uhd 4k demo video from flash drive, no luck here too.



bdht said:


> it doesnt sound like the screens defective though


The colors are dull everywhere not just in movies. And since we measured 20fl in worst case scenario of 0.6 gain, what else it could be?



bdht said:


> i ordered a vividstorm sample so i can make a comparison when it arrives


Can you please tell me where you ordered vividstorm sample? Amazon? Alibaba?


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> Can you please tell me where you ordered vividstorm sample? Amazon?


amazon



Harpoonz said:


> Both dynamic contrast and colors are enabled by default. Disabling them does not affect brightness.


dynamic contrast could be reducing light output in darker scenes, thats what the function typically does anyway... dynamic colors im not sure. 

and office mode may have an incorrect white balance for the extra brightness.

try turning the dynamic functions off and setting back light to movie mode.

is there a gamma setting?

which image mode are you using? standard, movie, picture, sport, monitor, game,or user memory 

what are the options for this color range setting?








hmm... the phc review has contrast and saturation turned up for HDR:
1080P SDR:
Brightness: 48
Contrast: 44
Saturation: 36
Sharpness: 30
Shade: 54
Custom colors:
R: 1130
G: 1012
B: 950

4K HDR:
Brightness: 46
Contrast: 80
Saturation: 65
Sharpness: 30
Shade: 54
Custom colors:
R: 1130
G: 1012
B: 950


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> 3.35m


so a 1.25 throw? that's pretty close for an alr screen, hotspotting could contribute to a dimmer looking image also. i think the alpd3.0s uniformity is pretty decent though, ~80%, so it shouldnt be too bad.


----------



## Harpoonz

bdht said:


> try turning the dynamic functions off and setting back light to movie mode.


Picture in movie gets a bit brighter with dynamic contrast off.



bdht said:


> is there a gamma setting?


Nope. I posted all available settings in previous posts 



bdht said:


> which image mode are you using? standard, movie, picture, sport, monitor, game,or user memory


User - used AVS HD 709 samples contrast and brightness calibration just like you suggested.



bdht said:


> what are the options for this color range setting?
> View attachment 3091254


This menu available only for external sources. Checked it with android TV box. 
Picture profiles - same as display parameters (screenshot in previous posts)
Light mode - movie / office. 
Color range - AUTO, Full, Part.

Switching between "full" and "part" does not help much.



bdht said:


> hmm... the phc review has contrast and saturation turned up for HDR:
> 1080P SDR:
> Brightness: 48
> Contrast: 44
> Saturation: 36
> Sharpness: 30
> Shade: 54
> Custom colors:
> R: 1130
> G: 1012
> B: 950
> 
> 4K HDR:
> Brightness: 46
> Contrast: 80
> Saturation: 65
> Sharpness: 30
> Shade: 54
> Custom colors:
> R: 1130
> G: 1012
> B: 950


I used 4k hdr settings from PHC review and mentioned about it in previous posts too 

In term of brightness i expected something similar to vividstorm 0.8: 





At 00:15, picture projected on the white wall and when projected on the screen the brightness hardly lowered. When i project on the white ceiling above xy screen, the picture brightness is awesome, but when i put it back on the screen it's lose too much brightness.
Guess i'll have to get vividstorm samples and compare it .


----------



## AmigoHD

Anyone tested a sample of Sound Max5 HG microperforated material?


----------



## bdht

Harpoonz said:


> Guess i'll have to get vividstorm samples and compare it


its a very similar material, but just a bit brighter than the xy bc, and slightly more sparkle due to that. It's not as bright as the parallax 0.8, so only slightly brighter than the xy bc is a good description. i would guess due to that also half gain could be slightly lower, as well as rec throw distance for hotspotting, but i have not attempted to ascertain to what extent xD

i dont know that it would be enough to satisfy you, did you purchase an alr screen because of viewing in high ambient light? or due to an imperfect reflective room? or to "help with black levels"? if you can correct the crush that your photo showed, it may offset the inadequate perceived brightness. if you're viewing in higher ambient light try raising the brightness much higher to offset washout/crushed low level detail.


----------



## jsmith967

daveb975 said:


> Did your screen arrive yet?
> 
> I'd be interested to find out how well the Soundmax 4K material tensions on your screen, as it is about the only complaint I have with mine (100" 16:9).
> 
> My screen has some ripples in it and the tab tensioning doesn't seem to resolve it. I don't know if there is any way to adjust it at the top or just the bottom?
> 
> It's not a major issue on most content fortunately - it shows up on fast panning sports and a page of text looks a bit 'wonky', but for general films/TV it is harder to see.
> 
> I don't know if it is the EC2 tensioning system that is at fault or just that this type of material is hard to tension.
> 
> It's a shame because I'm delighted with the screen apart from that. The two things that I was worried about were the black surround not being dark enough for the overspill from my Benq HT3550 and the thin material with no backing causing reflections on the TV behind. Neither have been a problem at all.


I am interested in the 4k weave tab tensioned screen. I am wondering if you ever resolved the ripples. The main reason for getting a tab tensioned screen is to remove the ripples so this is concerning that yours has it. I have already order samples of the Soundmax 4k and it measures very close to the Seymour XD material (the XD material is barely brighter but with more texture). Anyway, I know on some tab screens, there is a way to adjust the tension, were you able to resolve the ripples on your XYScreens Soundmax 4k tab-tensioned screen?


----------



## jsmith967

evanft said:


> I went with Soundmax 4k.
> 
> Screen has been installed. I can't say enough about XY's mounting design. Here are a few quick tips:
> 
> 
> The hooks included with the mounting brackets have very in the way of adjustability. Replace them with 2" eye bolts to gain a little bit of adjustment.
> The included IR adapter seems to be too big for the hole in the side of the unit. An extension cable with a small male end fixed this problem.
> The XY screen does not appear to be in the Harmony database. I added a random screen that was and then overwrote the up/down commands with the ones from the XY remote.
> There's no included way to attach the IR sensor, so I just stuck it on using a piece of 3M VHB tape
> The 12V trigger input appears to be a 2.5 mm jack. Very strange.
> Black felt tape did a great job in making the housing black.


I have asked this to another member but I'd also be interested in whether your screen has ripples/wrinkle with the Soundmax 4k fabric and tab tensioned. We would appreciate any insight or pictures you have of the screen, especially since you've now had it for a while and can comment on the quality longevity of the screen and its resistance to ripples. 

Thanks so much!


----------



## jsmith967

Also, I'd appreciate anyone sharing who has purchased XYScreens to share the flatness of the tab-tensioned. Does anyone have anything to add? Thanks for your insight !


----------



## jsmith967

No one can give any input?


----------



## aprogressivone

I just set up my 115" XY Screens Black Crystal .8 gain screen. I initially went with the Black Crystal 2.0 high gain, but I noticed horizontal lines that run across the screen. They are uniform and were every 12-13inches. I emailed XY Screens about this and I was told this can occur with their high gain. The material is a harder material which is then coated. During the coating process is how those lines occur. They might not be visible from a greater distance, but since I was only 12 feet away I could notice them during bright scenes. I was initially afraid of the darkness of the XY Black Crystal .8 gain when comparing the sample side by side with the high gain sample. After I swapped over my screen material, you don't even notice. Don't judge the darkness of the sample from such a small piece of material. I am running a Sony VPL-HW45es which is not exactly a light cannon. The first 2 pics show the lines that occur with the high gain. The following pics are the regular Black Crystal.

High Gain issues














Regular Black Crystal


----------



## Cremer Lee

jsmith967 said:


> Also, I'd appreciate anyone sharing who has purchased XYScreens to share the flatness of the tab-tensioned. Does anyone have anything to add? Thanks for your insight !

































Share you some pictures, thanks.


----------



## jsmith967

Cremer Lee said:


> Share you some pictures, thanks.


I appreciate the pictures, thanks for sharing. However, I was looking for pictures of those who owned the screens OVER TIME. The pictures you provided (also on their website) are new screens. I read above (see my quote) that some wrinkles developed in some people's screens and that is what I was wanting to know about.


----------



## Cremer Lee

jsmith967 said:


> I appreciate the pictures, thanks for sharing. However, I was looking for pictures of those who owned the screens OVER TIME. The pictures you provided (also on their website) are new screens. I read above (see my quote) that some wrinkles developed in some people's screens and that is what I was wanting to know about.


For the Motorized projector screen with Sound Max 4K, even for the new screen, also will have some wrinkles, to be honest. If you care about this, better do with Sound Max 5 or Sound Max 8K, much more flat.


----------



## jsmith967

Cremer Lee said:


> For the Motorized projector screen with Sound Max 4K, even for the new screen, also will have some wrinkles, to be honest. If you care about this, better do with Sound Max 5 or Sound Max 8K, much more flat.


Thanks for the reply and insight. Do you own the Sound Max 4K? How do you know they lay much flatter? Or, do you sell them, are you part of the XYScreens company? I have samples of all three (Sound Max 4k, 5, and 8k) and Sound Max 4k is by far the best material.


----------



## jsmith967

For others, here are some measurements I've done on the material and comparisons to other common materials for reference (these are not absolute measurements but simply for comparisons). My projector is calibrated to the Center Stage XD, which is why it has the least errors. As you can see, the 4k and the XD screen are quite close and on video content, it is hard to tell them apart except that the 4K material has less texture than the XD material.


XY screen Sound Max 4k
x: .3128
y: .3249
Y: 68.59
E: 2.3
Delata xy: .0042

XY Screen Sound Max 8k
x: .3132
y: .3247
Y: 59.773
E: 2.2
Delata xy: .0043

Elite UHD
x: .3131
y: .3250
Y: 65.973
E: 2.2
Delata xy: .0040

Seymour Center Stage XD (my current screen fabric on a DIY fixed frame)
x: .3252
y: .3275
Y: 71.06
E: 1
Delata xy: .0029

Seymour Center Stage UF
x: .3138
y: .3251
Y: 58.074
E: 1.9
Delata xy: .004

Dreamweave v7 (this is apparently a 'contaminated' sample that does not reflect an uncontaminated/full version of the fabric)
x: .3174
y: .3307
Y: 63.905
E: 2.2
Delata xy: .0050

Stewart 100
x: .3147
y: .3253
Y: 85.2
E: 2.0
Delata xy: .0042


----------



## jsmith967

Picture comparison of brightness:










Seating/Viewing distance: 7.5 feet

Samples:
Left half: Seymour Center Stage XD (my DIY fixed frame screen)
On the right half side:
Top left: Stewart 100
Top center: Dreamweave v7
Top right: Elite UHD
Bottom: XYScreens Sound Max 4K

Notes on texture and brightness in video: 
The Dreamweave is comparatively dim (again, this is apparently a 'contaminated' sample that does not reflect an uncontaminated/full version of the fabric)
Difficult to tell XYScreen Sound Max 4K and Elite UHD apart.
The Seymour Center Stage XD is just a tad brighter than the XY Sound Max 4K. The XY Sound Max 4k, Dreamweave v7, and Elite Acoustic UHD have no texture. The Stewart has a slight sparkle that is not presence on the rest. The Center Stage XD has a slight weave texture (as has been noted by others at this viewing distance).


----------



## Cremer Lee

jsmith967 said:


> Thanks for the reply and insight. Do you own the Sound Max 4K? How do you know they lay much flatter? Or, do you sell them, are you part of the XYScreens company? I have samples of all three (Sound Max 4k, 5, and 8k) and Sound Max 4k is by far the best material.


Yes, I am the foreign trade manager of XY Screens., if you go through the Page 1 of this review, you will knew my name, haha....thanks for your above comparative study of our three AT screen fabrics.


----------



## Lygren

jsmith967 said:


> Picture comparison of brightness:
> 
> View attachment 3115895
> 
> 
> Seating/Viewing distance: 7.5 feet
> 
> Samples:
> Left half: Seymour Center Stage XD (my DIY fixed frame screen)
> On the right half side:
> Top left: Stewart 100
> Top center: Dreamweave v7
> Top right: Elite UHD
> Bottom: XYScreens Sound Max 4K
> 
> Notes on texture and brightness in video:
> The Dreamweave is comparatively dim
> Difficult to tell XYScreen Sound Max 4K and Elite UHD apart.
> The Seymour Center Stage XD is just a tad brighter than the XY Sound Max 4K. The XY Sound Max 4k, Dreamweave v7, and Elite Acoustic UHD have no texture. The Stewart has a slight sparkle that is not presence on the rest. The Center Stage XD has a slight weave texture (as has been noted by others at this viewing distance).


That´s probably not a v7 you have there (if you do, something is certainly wrong with that sample), you can actually find a comparison to Sound Max 4K, which is actually the fabric we compared the v7 against (in addition to the Studiotek 100 as our reference) being one of the brightest and tightest single-layered weaves we found to compare again in the v7-product text (look towards the bottom of the products-page for measurement data supplied by our THX / ISF-certified calibrator Gorm Sorensen). My guess is that you might have mistaken a v6 sample for a v7?

Other than that I am certainly glad people compare and measure, but given that I am confident the data you have supplied here is not that of a v7 I felt I had to comment on just that. Keep on´ measurin´!


----------



## jsmith967

Lygren said:


> That´s probably not a v7 you have there (if you do, something is certainly wrong with that sample), you can actually find a comparison to Sound Max 4K, which is actually the fabric we compared the v7 against (in addition to the Studiotek 100 as our reference) being one of the brightest and tightest single-layered weaves we found to compare again in the v7-product text (look towards the bottom of the products-page for measurement data supplied by our THX / ISF-certified calibrator Gorm Sorensen). My guess is that you might have mistaken a v6 sample for a v7?
> 
> Other than that I am certainly glad people compare and measure, but given that I am confident the data you have supplied here is not that of a v7 I felt I had to comment on just that. Keep on´ measurin´!


Hi Lygren, 

Thanks for the heads up. A few questions: 

Where is the comparison to XYScreens SoundMax 4K? All I see is the comparison to the Studiotek 100 (I went to this address). Is XYScreens SoundMax 4K the "Test Fabric #1"? 
I checked my sample order of the Dreamscreen ultraweave and it indicates it is a v7. I pulled out the sample I have and it does not have any indicator or label. So I suppose it is possible that it is v6, although I think it is unlikely given that the order says v6, but maybe they made a mistake and sent me v6 for some reason. If so, how can I get v7? 
Thanks!


----------



## Lygren

jsmith967 said:


> Hi Lygren,
> 
> Thanks for the heads up. A few questions:
> 
> Where is the comparison to XYScreens SoundMax 4K? All I see is the comparison to the Studiotek 100 (I went to this address). Is XYScreens SoundMax 4K the "Test Fabric #1"?
> I checked my sample order of the Dreamscreen ultraweave and it indicates it is a v7. I pulled out the sample I have and it does not have any indicator or label. So I suppose it is possible that it is v6, although I think it is unlikely given that the order says v6, but maybe they made a mistake and sent me v6 for some reason. If so, how can I get v7?
> Thanks!


Yes, "test fabric #1" in that comparison-test is the soundmax 4K, and you can see those values seem to about correlate with yours for the Soundmax 4K vs. Studiotek 100, while your v7-values seems to correlate more for that of v6. As for the sample you are using for measurements, if you take a couple of close-up photos and send it to info @ dreamscreen . no we can confirm whether it is a v6 or v7 for you. Also, and I am sure you have remembered this, all woven / knitted basic 1-layered fabrics must be measured with a proper black backing behind them, or you would be measuring the combined reflection of the fabric it is attached to.


----------



## jsmith967

Lygren said:


> Yes, "test fabric #1" in that comparison-test is the soundmax 4K, and you can see those values seem to about correlate with yours for the Soundmax 4K vs. Studiotek 100, while your v7-values seems to correlate more for that of v6. As for the sample you are using for measurements, if you take a couple of close-up photos and send it to info @ dreamscreen . no we can confirm whether it is a v6 or v7 for you. Also, and I am sure you have remembered this, all woven / knitted basic 1-layered fabrics must be measured with a proper black backing behind them, or you would be measuring the combined reflection of the fabric it is attached to.


Great, I'll send a few photos now.


----------



## jsmith967

Lygren said:


> That´s probably not a v7 you have there (if you do, something is certainly wrong with that sample), you can actually find a comparison to Sound Max 4K, which is actually the fabric we compared the v7 against (in addition to the Studiotek 100 as our reference) being one of the brightest and tightest single-layered weaves we found to compare again in the v7-product text (look towards the bottom of the products-page for measurement data supplied by our THX / ISF-certified calibrator Gorm Sorensen). My guess is that you might have mistaken a v6 sample for a v7?
> 
> Other than that I am certainly glad people compare and measure, but given that I am confident the data you have supplied here is not that of a v7 I felt I had to comment on just that. Keep on´ measurin´!


Just to update about my comparison a few posts back, I have noted that my measurements are of a contaminated sample of the Dreamweave v7. 

To others in the thread: my post a few back compared the Dreamweave v7 to XYScreen fabrics and others. It seems as though I have a contaminated sample, not a production sample.


----------



## sathyakamaraj

Anyone purchased thin frame projector screen from them? With soundmax 4k fabric? 150" and above...I am looking at 200"


----------



## ThaiChris

sathyakamaraj said:


> Anyone purchased thin frame projector screen from them? With soundmax 4k fabric? 150" and above...I am looking at 200"


I have soundmax 4k 165" - very satisfied!


----------



## sathyakamaraj

ThaiChris said:


> I have soundmax 4k 165" - very satisfied!


Thanks !!! Is it a thin frame or hk80c frame?
12mm or 80mm frame border?


----------



## ThaiChris

sathyakamaraj said:


> Thanks !!! Is it a thin frame or hk80c frame?
> 12mm or 80mm frame border?


The big one - and also i used black self-adhesive velvet to cover all the area in front of MLP - best improvement ever . When i watch movie - i see only the movie and nothing else with zero reflections.


----------



## sathyakamaraj

ThaiChris said:


> The big one - and also i used black self-adhesive velvet to cover all the area in front of MLP - best improvement ever . When i watch movie - i see only the movie and nothing else with zero reflections.


Please share the picture if you can on the velvet !!! Thanks. I didnt do this on 150 Soundmax 4k 80mm frame HK80C


----------



## ThaiChris

sathyakamaraj said:


> Please share the picture if you can on the velvet !!! Thanks. I didnt do this on 150 Soundmax 4k 80mm frame HK80C


Its wide-lens picture so the proportions of the room are not good  - screen looks small but its 4m wide


----------



## Hawks07

jsmith967 said:


> Just to update about my comparison a few posts back, I have noted that my measurements are of a contaminated sample of the Dreamweave v7.
> 
> To others in the thread: my post a few back compared the Dreamweave v7 to XYScreen fabrics and others. It seems as though I have a contaminated sample, not a production sample.


Did you ever get a proper v7 sample to test?


----------



## jsmith967

Hawks07 said:


> Did you ever get a proper v7 sample to test?


It's in the mail. I will report back in a while when I test again. Won't be able to test for a while.


----------



## akeela11

I think is a far away day's when we look on a wall alr screen during the daylight.


----------



## da9el84

Hey, just pitching in here for the XY Screen.

I purchased the 120" ALR PET Crystal in April '21 and my screen is paired with a LSP9T.

I got a frame with a warped upper frame and particularly the top right corner. After talking to support, their suggestion was to try and bend it back myself... Or to move the projector further to the screen, loosing some screen realestate, but moving the image as much as possible from the warped corner...

I think we can all agree that both suggestions are lackluster at best.

I learned to live with it, albeit being really annoyed at it when watching full screen content.

Today I went to watch a show and to my surprice, the whole screen is now wavy and it looks like the screen fabric has stretched where the springs are hooked in.



















We are in the start of summer here, with temps reaching 25 degrees celcius for a few days now, but nothing crazy and I don't expect us to see much higher temperatures than that, but the screen is completely useless now with distortions all over the image.










With my current experience, I can't recommend XYScreens to anyone looking for a serious projector UST setup.

And I'll be looking for a replacement....


----------



## noah katz

I'd ask them to send a replacement frame piece or whole frame if necessary, and point out that they could improve their reputation when you report their proper handling of the issue instead of getting a black mark as it stands now.


----------



## da9el84

noah katz said:


> I'd ask them to send a replacement frame piece or whole frame if necessary, and point out that they could improve their reputation when you report their proper handling of the issue instead of getting a black mark as it stands now.


This was their reply....


----------



## noah katz

I don't know if the wrinkles are related to the frame damage, but regardless that only addresses the former and not the latter.

Since you have nothing to lose at this point*, I'd write a more forceful letter per what I said above.

* Unless you bought it through aliexpress where there's a resolution process and you can leave a bad review.


----------



## da9el84

Thanks Noah, I let them know of my dissatisfactory in my latest email. Really disappointed in the service.
I purchased it directly from the company.

The wrinkles are not related to the bent frame, the fabric has been fine for months. The only thing I can think of is heat. It was perfectly fine all night Friday and by Sunday it looked like the wavy mess I posted.


----------



## Cremer Lee

da9el84 said:


> Thanks Noah, I let them know of my dissatisfactory in my latest email. Really disappointed in the service.
> I purchased it directly from the company.
> 
> The wrinkles are not related to the bent frame, the fabric has been fine for months. The only thing I can think of is heat. It was perfectly fine all night Friday and by Sunday it looked like the wavy mess I posted.


Hi friend, Sorry to hear that your got this bad experience for our screen. 
I want to confirm with you that if you had this wavy at the beginning or the wavy came out after some time?


----------



## da9el84

Cremer Lee said:


> Hi friend, Sorry to hear that your got this bad experience for our screen.
> I want to confirm with you that if you had this wavy at the beginning or the wavy came out after some time?


This happened after 2 months of use. The screen fabric was perfectly tight with no distortions apart from the bent frame(which was there from the start). I've attached a picture of the frame dismounted from the wall to show that it's not straight.

The uneven frame didn't cause any ripples/waves/crinkles in the fabric, I am 99% sure this was an issue with the fabric distorting as a result of the weather getting hotter.


----------



## Cremer Lee

da9el84 said:


> This happened after 2 months of use. The screen fabric was perfectly tight with no distortions apart from the bent frame(which was there from the start). I've attached a picture of the frame dismounted from the wall to show that it's not straight.
> 
> The uneven frame didn't cause any ripples/waves/crinkles in the fabric, I am 99% sure this was an issue with the fabric distorting as a result of the weather getting hotter.


OK, thanks for your confirmed. Let's try to find out the reasons and fixed the plobrom.
1-If your put any heaters nearby the screen fabric? Or just the normal room temperature? I know Denmark is hot, but not hotter than many other countries, like India, Kuwait and the Africa. What's more, we also have many clients in Denmark as well. But others no meet the same issue.
2-If you already try the disassembly and reinstall it afte the waves came out? Or maybe you can open the outter frame of the back side to see if any springs unstuck?

when you redo the installtion, if you see any waves, you can refer to the below Youtube video for a reference. Thanks. Hope can make you some helps here.


----------



## da9el84

Cremer Lee said:


> OK, thanks for your confirmed. Let's try to find out the reasons and fixed the plobrom.
> 1-If your put any heaters nearby the screen fabric? Or just the normal room temperature? I know Denmark is hot, but not hotter than many other countries, like India, Kuwait and the Africa. What's more, we also have many clients in Denmark as well. But others no meet the same issue.
> 2-If you already try the disassembly and reinstall it afte the waves came out? Or maybe you can open the outter frame of the back side to see if any springs unstuck?
> 
> when you redo the installtion, if you see any waves, you can refer to the below Youtube video for a reference. Thanks. Hope can make you some helps here.


1. No heaters near it - no heaters running, it's summer...

2. I didn't try dissassembly, obviously there is something wrong with the product, this fabric issue along with the frame being bent upon receipt is enough for me. I reached out to XYscreen and your solution is to have me try and fix the issues, which in my book is the wrong approach...

I am not going to take it apart again, the fabric is correctly mounted and has been completely flush for 2 months of usage. If XYscreen isn't going to provide a solution, I will be looking for another product to use.


----------



## da9el84

You can see these images from when I contacted you about the bent frame in April that the image is even with no visible wrinkles.


----------



## jsmith967

This does not look for XY Screens if they do not stand behind their product. Thanks for sharing this with us. This will factor in to whether I end up going with XY Screens. If they do not resolve your problem, I doubt I'll go with them.


----------



## Cremer Lee

da9el84 said:


> 1. No heaters near it - no heaters running, it's summer...
> 
> 2. I didn't try dissassembly, obviously there is something wrong with the product, this fabric issue along with the frame being bent upon receipt is enough for me. I reached out to XYscreen and your solution is to have me try and fix the issues, which in my book is the wrong approach...
> 
> I am not going to take it apart again, the fabric is correctly mounted and has been completely flush for 2 months of usage. If XYscreen isn't going to provide a solution, I will be looking for another product to use.


Haha...in that case hard to solve the problm, my friend. You already identified it's belong to fabric issue, but also without any Sufficient basis here, right? As you said you already satisfying the screen with two months time, but just "something" happend sudden, so both of us need to find out the real reasons. But not just judge by personal mind.

We don't want to shirk, but just want to solve it well, we also not said any words that was wrong by your side.

Just want to make sure how this happend? So want you to help to take a look the back side of the frame see if any springs loosen or not? 

You even need to do a new installation if we send you a new screen fabric, to say the least. 

This is belong to the Public BBS, what we willing to do is solve the problem. I think also many of our clients(i meant who own one of our screen) can see this, they can testify the XY Screens brand as well.


----------



## da9el84

Cremer Lee said:


> Haha...in that case hard to solve the problm, my friend. You already identified it's belong to fabric issue, but also without any Sufficient basis here, right? As you said you already satisfying the screen with two months time, but just "something" happend sudden, so both of us need to find out the real reasons. But not just judge by personal mind.
> 
> We don't want to shirk, but just want to solve it well, we also not said any words that was wrong by your side.
> 
> Just want to make sure how this happend? So want you to help to take a look the back side of the frame see if any springs loosen or not?
> 
> You even need to do a new installation if we send you a new screen fabric, to say the least.
> 
> This is belong to the Public BBS, what we willing to do is solve the problem. I think also many of our clients(i meant who own one of our screen) can see this, they can testify the XY Screens brand as well.


We just had a cooler few days and the fabric is now almost flush again, so it definitely has something to do with temperature



















What was it about my conclusion that it was a fabric issue that was "insufficient"? The canvas was flat for 2 months, then it got hotter and the fabric stretched quite visibly. The assumption that it was heat was pretty clear cut. 

Don't worry about handling this case any longer, I am done with XYScreens, I just want this up there for others to see.


----------



## da9el84

Here is the pattern test comparison. Much better but still not straight.


----------



## Cremer Lee

da9el84 said:


> We just had a cooler few days and the fabric is now almost flush again, so it definitely has something to do with temperature
> 
> 
> What was it about my conclusion that it was a fabric issue that was "insufficient"? The canvas was flat for 2 months, then it got hotter and the fabric stretched quite visibly. The assumption that it was heat was pretty clear cut.
> 
> Don't worry about handling this case any longer, I am done with XYScreens, I just want this up there for others to see.


OK， I See it. Thanks for your sharing anyway.
By the way, here now 35 degree in my city.


----------



## da9el84

Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse, I got sick and the weather changed, so it's a cold day today(15 degrees C). But at least I can lie down on the couch and watch some movi.... WHAT?




























Yeah, hot/cold doesn't affect the fabric. "Ok".


----------



## noob00224

@da9el84 in my opinion there is something wrong with the frame/parts, the fabric should not do that regardless of the weather.

It is possible there is some issue with the mounting/installation, you could reinstall it carefully, you have nothing to loose.

You could also build a wooden frame and use the fabric you already have, it would be cost effective if you're ok with diy.


----------



## da9el84

noob00224 said:


> @da9el84 in my opinion there is something wrong with the frame/parts, the fabric should not do that regardless of the weather.
> 
> It is possible there is some issue with the mounting/installation, you could reinstall it carefully, you have nothing to loose.
> 
> You could also build a wooden frame and use the fabric you already have, it would be cost effective if you're ok with diy.


Yeah, that's clear.

The thing is, I don't spend 1200$ for a professional screen to then start doing diy work on it. It's clear that the company isn't taking responsibility, so my best guess is that this isn't the first complaint they had on this subject and know there is no fix for it, hence not just shipping me a new error free model.

The fabric has been flat for the first few months, the issue only arose with a change in temperature, and now that it cooled off, the wrinkles are worse than ever, suggesting that my version of the fabric is very sensitive to fluctuations.


----------



## da9el84

For anyone wondering how wrinkles like this translates into the image. (horizontal lines are missmatch between camera shutter and projector, it's not visible irl)


----------



## Cremer Lee

Share a newest product reviews on XY Screens, he also from Denmark


----------



## da9el84

Cremer Lee said:


> View attachment 3152309
> 
> 
> Share a newest product reviews on XY Screens, he also from Denmark


Yeah, I could have written a similar review apart from the bent frame I received. My issues didn't show in the first 2 months of usage...


----------



## stef2

Sheesh, thanks for sharing this! I would not be happy if the vendor refused to fix that, right away.


----------



## Han Wedge

da9el84 said:


> Yeah, I could have written a similar review apart from the bent frame I received. My issues didn't show in the first 2 months of usage...


Any update?


----------



## jsmith967

Han Wedge said:


> Any update?


I'd like to know an update as well.


----------



## da9el84

Han Wedge said:


> Any update?


It became clear that the screen changed depending on the weather. Cooler days the screen was less wavy, but on hot days it was terrible.

This Saturday I actaully had the screen dismounted as I had invited family over for a movienight and I dissassembled it, unhooked the springs holding the fabric and remounted them with a slight angle towards each of the 4 corners. It has helped on the wavyness which is now at a minimum, but the screen is far from perfect, with the top piece of the frame still bending slightly outwards from the wall, causing the image to "droop" in the top right corner.

You can clearly see it here, where I have to position the projector to actaully overshoot some of the frame in order to fill out the corner, that would otherwise droop (the blue line is meant to be straight)

With the quality and customer service I've experienced from XYscreens, I can never recommend them to anybody.


----------



## da9el84

You can see what I mean here in the video where I show how it bends outwards:







And an image showing the lack of image in the top corner, because the frame isn't straight...


----------



## Han Wedge

Thanks for your feedback.. I'm not gonna buy from them....


----------



## jsmith967

I'm not going to either. This is just not acceptable.


----------



## labman1

Has anyone seen or used the max 8k fabric?

Sent from my SM-T817T using Tapatalk


----------



## jsmith967

labman1 said:


> Has anyone seen or used the max 8k fabric?
> 
> Sent from my SM-T817T using Tapatalk


I've tested the 8k to others. It is supper smooth, smoother than the 4k, but the 4k is already smooth from 7ft viewing distance. In comparison, the Seymour XD shows texture at 9 or 10 feet. The 8k is the least bright between these three, and it is noticeable. Comparing it to the 4k, I prefer the 4k material. The 4k is just a few percentage dimmer than XD, virtually the same. The XD is simply the brightest best material there is for far viewing. For a more in depth comparison, see 25 Acoustically Transparent Screens Tested


----------



## jsmith967

labman1 said:


> Has anyone seen or used the max 8k fabric?
> 
> Sent from my SM-T817T using Tapatalk


Here is the most updated: 








[Updated 10/21/21] 31 Acoustically Transparent Screen...


Looks like someone measured it at 0.95 gain: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/elunevision-audioweave-reference-4k-need-real-world-feedback.3043356/ At the end of that post another said he measured it at .78 gain, said it added nothing visually, not sure what that means, in the end said it was...




www.avsforum.com


----------



## newoski

How close does everyone have their speakers to the XYScreen 4K acoustic screen?


----------



## Cremer Lee

newoski said:


> How close does everyone have their speakers to the XYScreen 4K acoustic screen?


Depend on how big of your speaker. Like 5-10cm


----------



## BKEW

So been reworking my HT in the last 2 months _(took out some walls to widen and extended room...so whole area is war zone currently)_

Prior room was fairly small and setup was with open area speakers _(stands and wall hung)_ and now will be going in-wall. Really wanted to go with an AT Screen.

I tried the XD prior and though a great product the texture is way to visible to me. Did not try the other model that escapes me. Sample of the V7 and though it is very nice the price was questionable to me when matched up with the XY 4K side by side. . I will note the V7, as many have noted may of been a contaminated as it was darker then expected. V7 material though is interesting. Very smooth and had great AT aspects so they are doing some seriously solid research and would say for sure give them a look if you searching for a AT Screen.

After testing I took a chance and I ordered a 140" - 2:35:1 in the 80mm frame.

*FARME :* I have had a few over the years _(2 still in the basement sadly)._ Ranging from an old 90" Stewart_, _120" Elite and 138" Silver Ticket and I will say of those noted the XY screen frame is WAY more solid and stout then any of those. I know a prior post had issues but that appears to be the narrow frame so wondering if that is an issue with that frame. I can tell you flat out if someone tried to bend the 80mm frame on the XY setup it would have to be run over by a truck.. IT is that solid. Trade off is it weighs more then others so make sure your plan for that. The one I purchased has two cross bar supports and it must weight 30-40% heavier then the others.

*SCREEN:* The last screen I had up was gray and 1.2-1.3 gain _(or so listed)_ and I was worried I would loose brightness. Very happy to say I did not or do not see any difference. Honestly the wife said she noticed the XY screen looks better right away. The color accuracy is much better, which I know is somewhat norm with lower gain screens. The texture is smooth. Really smooth. I would say you would have to be 4 feet from the screen to see it. Sound wise it is on par with them all. I only had a sample of the V7 but I still wonder if that might have a "bit" better sound aspect. No proof just comparing the material by hand.

_I hung it this weekend to set speaker location for backer boxes and took a few screen shots. Not sure the phone camera does it justice. _

Overall I am very happy in the purchase and would recommend 4K 80mm XY Screen. _I will be the first to admit I was pretty nervous on the purchase by just seeing samples and some concerns on shipping but the whole process was excellent. _


----------



## newoski

BKEW said:


> So been reworking my HT in the last 2 months _(took out some walls to widen and extended room...so whole area is war zone currently)_
> 
> Prior room was fairly small and setup was with open area speakers _(stands and wall hung)_ and now will be going in-wall. Really wanted to go with an AT Screen.
> 
> I tried the XD prior and though a great product the texture is way to visible to me. Did not try the other model that escapes me. Sample of the V7 and though it is very nice the price was questionable to me when matched up with the XY 4K side by side. . I will note the V7, as many have noted may of been a contaminated as it was darker then expected. V7 material though is interesting. Very smooth and had great AT aspects so they are doing some seriously solid research and would say for sure give them a look if you searching for a AT Screen.
> 
> After testing I took a chance and I ordered a 140" - 2:35:1 in the 80mm frame.
> 
> *FARME :* I have had a few over the years _(2 still in the basement sadly)._ Ranging from an old 90" Stewart_, _120" Elite and 138" Silver Ticket and I will say of those noted the XY screen frame is WAY more solid and stout then any of those. I know a prior post had issues but that appears to be the narrow frame so wondering if that is an issue with that frame. I can tell you flat out if someone tried to bend the 80mm frame on the XY setup it would have to be run over by a truck.. IT is that solid. Trade off is it weighs more then others so make sure your plan for that. The one I purchased has two cross bar supports and it must weight 30-40% heavier then the others.
> 
> *SCREEN:* The last screen I had up was gray and 1.2-1.3 gain _(or so listed)_ and I was worried I would loose brightness. Very happy to say I did not or do not see any difference. Honestly the wife said she noticed the XY screen looks better right away. The color accuracy is much better, which I know is somewhat norm with lower gain screens. The texture is smooth. Really smooth. I would say you would have to be 4 feet from the screen to see it. Sound wise it is on par with them all. I only had a sample of the V7 but I still wonder if that might have a "bit" better sound aspect. No proof just comparing the material by hand.
> 
> _I hung it this weekend to set speaker location for backer boxes and took a few screen shots. Not sure the phone camera does it justice. _
> 
> Overall I am very happy in the purchase and would recommend 4K 80mm XY Screen. _I will be the first to admit I was pretty nervous on the purchase by just seeing samples and some concerns on shipping but the whole process was excellent. _
> 
> View attachment 3206212
> 
> View attachment 3206198
> View attachment 3206199
> View attachment 3206200


Any issues with Moiré?


----------



## BKEW

newoski said:


> Any issues with Moiré?


None. 

I was worried about it as the XD I did rotate. The weave is really tight and smooth compared to what we have seen in prior years. Ability to make screen materials is changing for the better which is good for all of us.

The V7 was something completely different then anything else. Bonded fibers is what it appeared to be.


----------



## BKEW

I should note I worked with Cremer Lee like many on here. Very helpful and responsive to all questions and process. As noted was a little worried on ordering but the process was really smooth and as advertised.


----------



## Andytrackk

106" Black Crystal:



http://imgur.com/TwuzK2f


Screen is perfect, as was ordering and delivery. Can't fully evaluate it, as the old projector is out and the new one isn't here yet, but I still enjoy looking at it...


----------



## Hawks07

BKEW said:


> I should note I worked with Cremer Lee like many on here. Very helpful and responsive to all questions and process. As noted was a little worried on ordering but the process was really smooth and as advertised.


I see that you are swapping out the XY for a Stewart already. What are your main reasons for switching. 
Thanks


----------



## BKEW

Hawks07 said:


> I see that you are swapping out the XY for a Stewart already. What are your main reasons for switching.
> Thanks


A few reason that ended up being different then the plans when the basement was finished prior...........

I *was* going inwall speakers. The area behind the screen wall the main feed to the sub panel ended up being there....!! Not in the location shown on the approved plans...!! So would have to re route it and open a bunch more walls and given there is a bathroom to the side area I can really only go one way so a little pee'd the home builder did not route the power the *way it should of been on the plans*. I mean could I re-route it but it wll be like 2 times the price of the new screen opening up a lot of walls and patching them back. So selling the XY screen and not go AT speakers now...! *_Not really happy on that honestly.... _

Second the new NZ7 looks great, really great on the XY Screen with the really smooth texture. Though no longer able to go an AT speaker set up means I might as well pair the NZ7 with a brighter screen._ It was a tough choice honestly as the difference in dollars and time to rerun the power line in existing walls pretty much decided it... _Only bump I guess is XY list the screen at 1.0, we meaured it and got 0.9 so going Studiotek 130 gives a decent bump at 1.3 gain on fL. Should give the NZ7 a bit of head room per se, maybe using MID lamp on HDR (_maybe)_ Vs High lamp it flips to now when running HDR.

i will still stand by my original statements, the XY Screen is excellent product. As AT material goes it is right up there on the best I have seen.


----------



## Sean325

Andytrackk said:


> 106" Black Crystal:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/TwuzK2f
> 
> 
> Screen is perfect, as was ordering and delivery. Can't fully evaluate it, as the old projector is out and the new one isn't here yet, but I still enjoy looking at it...


Did you end up having a chance to try out the new screen yet?
-Sean


----------



## Hawks07

BKEW said:


> A few reason that ended up being different then the plans when the basement was finished prior...........
> 
> I *was* going inwall speakers. The area behind the screen wall the main feed to the sub panel ended up being there....!! Not in the location shown on the approved plans...!! So would have to re route it and open a bunch more walls and given there is a bathroom to the side area I can really only go one way so a little pee'd the home builder did not route the power the *way it should of been on the plans*. I mean could I re-route it but it wll be like 2 times the price of the new screen opening up a lot of walls and patching them back. So selling the XY screen and not go AT speakers now...! *_Not really happy on that honestly.... _
> 
> Second the new NZ7 looks great, really great on the XY Screen with the really smooth texture. Though no longer able to go an AT speaker set up means I might as well pair the NZ7 with a brighter screen._ It was a tough choice honestly as the difference in dollars and time to rerun the power line in existing walls pretty much decided it... _Only bump I guess is XY list the screen at 1.0, we meaured it and got 0.9 so going Studiotek 130 gives a decent bump at 1.3 gain on fL. Should give the NZ7 a bit of head room per se, maybe using MID lamp on HDR (_maybe)_ Vs High lamp it flips to now when running HDR.
> 
> i will still stand by my original statements, the XY Screen is excellent product. As AT material goes it is right up there on the best I have seen.


That makes sense and looks like everything worked out even though it was a pain. 
I thought about doing the Stewart Microperf but decided to stick with the XY and put the extra money I saved into an NZ8 instead of the NZ7 which should give me an extra brightness boost that will get me close to the Stewart. 
The Microperfs are nice and bright but I always see a little noise and graininess with them. The XY is super clean and looks like it will pair nice with the NZ8.


----------



## BKEW

Hawks07 said:


> That makes sense and looks like everything worked out even though it was a pain.
> I thought about doing the Stewart Microperf but decided to stick with the XY and put the extra money I saved into an NZ8 instead of the NZ7 which should give me an extra brightness boost that will get me close to the Stewart.
> The Microperfs are nice and bright but I always see a little noise and graininess with them. The XY is super clean and looks like it will pair nice with the NZ8.


Pretty sure you made the right choice, the Stewart microperf is CRAZY expensive to add to a screen. Shocked me and same reason I did XY to start. Hard to explain unless you see a XY screen the weave is sooo tight is was surprising how good it is.


----------



## Andytrackk

Sean325 said:


> Did you end up having a chance to try out the new screen yet?
> -Sean


Yes, I've had my new NZ8 for a few days now...

It's really a great screen. I'm coming from a Elite Screen MaxWhite (which is 1.1 gain), and my last projector was a Sony HW50ES. The NZ8 in medium laser with the DCI color filter engaged (which you see in the screen shots below) is roughly comparable in brightness to the Sony.

Given that I changed screens and projectors (and I never had the old screen/projector set up in this room), I was expecting everything to be different--and it is. The 0.8 gain vs. the 1.1 was noticeable at first, and I was a little bit worried if I had enough lumens to get the brightness I was used to. I went with the Black Crystal because this is a multi-purpose room with light walls and I wanted the flexibility to have the house lights on low for sports/casual watching. I have black velvet panels directly above the screen, but the rest of the room is bright. I also have a wide seating area and wanted something with a large viewing angle, which eliminated a lot of ALR options.

This screen is really impressing me so far. There is a bit of a texture and sparkle to the coating...I've not decided yet if it's enough to be distracting. The black levels with some low ambient light are good. My old MaxWhite screen was noticeably washed out in anything but pure darkness, and this Black Crystal does look better with the lights off, but I'm not running to turn them off whenever I turn the projector on. I think this strikes the balance I was looking for.

Viewing angles are good, and there's a little bit of a hotspot visible as you walk from one side to the other, but I also have the projector mounted at 1.4x the image width, which is fairly close and I expect that 1.5x or 1.6x would help this.

Ambient lights on:









Lights off:









Other lights on shots:



http://imgur.com/A3mJUWD




http://imgur.com/3bnX5gy


----------



## Sean325

Andytrackk said:


> Yes, I've had my new NZ8 for a few days now...
> 
> It's really a great screen. I'm coming from a Elite Screen MaxWhite (which is 1.1 gain), and my last projector was a Sony HW50ES. The NZ8 in medium laser with the DCI color filter engaged (which you see in the screen shots below) is roughly comparable in brightness to the Sony.
> 
> Given that I changed screens and projectors (and I never had the old screen/projector set up in this room), I was expecting everything to be different--and it is. The 0.8 gain vs. the 1.1 was noticeable at first, and I was a little bit worried if I had enough lumens to get the brightness I was used to. I went with the Black Crystal because this is a multi-purpose room with light walls and I wanted the flexibility to have the house lights on low for sports/casual watching. I made black velvet panels that magnetically attach to the ceiling directly above the screen because that part of the room has a low ceiling (I need to have the screen as close to the ceiling as possible). I also have a wide seating area wanted something with a large viewing angle, which eliminated a lot of ALR options.
> 
> This screen is really impressing me so far. There is a little bit of a texture and sparkle to the coating, but it's not strong enough to be distracting. The black levels with some low ambient light are really good. My old MaxWhite screen was noticeably washed out in anything but pure darkness, and this Black Crystal does look better with the lights off, but I'm not running to turn them off whenever I turn the projector on. I think this strikes the balance I was looking for.
> 
> Viewing angles are good, and there's a little bit of a hotspot visible as you walk from one side to the other, but I also have the projector mounted at 1.4x the image width, which is fairly close and I expect that 1.5x or 1.6x would help this.
> 
> Ambient lights on:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lights off:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other lights on shots:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/A3mJUWD
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/3bnX5gy


Thanks for the info! That is pretty awesome.

Since I am still learning...could you reduce the brightness of the projector (maybe ECO mode) to eliminate any hotspotting (rather than moving the projector further out?)


----------



## Andytrackk

Sean325 said:


> Thanks for the info! That is pretty awesome.
> 
> Since I am still learning...could you reduce the brightness of the projector (maybe ECO mode) to eliminate any hotspotting (rather than moving the projector further out?)


It’s not an issue of brightness, it’s essentially geometric in nature. It’s not really an issue with this screen, but for screens that say 1.5x required, it’s typically because anything less would be noticeable: the center of the screen would be too bright compared with the edges. Moving the projector back reduces the effect.


----------



## Javs

Has anyone ordered a fixed frame screen with masking from these guys?


----------



## MJ DOOM

Javs said:


> Has anyone ordered a fixed frame screen with masking from these guys?


masking? Manual panels or is it motorized?


----------



## Javs

MJ DOOM said:


> masking? Manual panels or is it motorized?


Its motorised, but after just speakingh with them on Whatsapp they just told me they dont want to sell it outside China since it requires a team to install, wtf. Shame.


----------



## MJ DOOM

Javs said:


> Its motorised, but after just speakingh with them on Whatsapp they just told me they dont want to sell it outside China since it requires a team to install, wtf. Shame.


A team? Wow. Any pics or videos of it? Didn’t see it on their site.


----------



## Javs

MJ DOOM said:


> A team? Wow. Any pics or videos of it? Didn’t see it on their site.








120inch Xyscreen 4k Masking Screen For Home Theater Mthk2-wf1 Pro - Buy Masking Screen For Home Theater,120inch 4k Masking Projection Screen,Masking Projector Screen For Home Theater Product on Alibaba.com


120inch Xyscreen 4k Masking Screen For Home Theater Mthk2-wf1 Pro - Buy Masking Screen For Home Theater,120inch 4k Masking Projection Screen,Masking Projector Screen For Home Theater Product on Alibaba.com



www.alibaba.com





To be honest I cannot see how it requires a team unless they think we are incapable of assembling and hanging something... Other manufacturers have no problem selling similar devices.


----------



## Brajesh

Guys, reading about the wavy screen issues and also positive reviews, unsure what to make out. Considering a 150-inch fixed frame PET Grid with .8 gain to pair with a UST projector. Still worth considering?


----------



## Rob79

Anyone try the GF1 gray material with a laser or led projector? Does the gray material have any speckle issues with laser or any downsides with standard 13-15 ft throw ratios?


----------



## rotpet

You might want to get in touch with this guy:






He tested it for a while with his JVC laser projector in a dedicated room and was very impressed with it…until he tested the WF1 Pro Max4K HG that is (which he ended up keeping).

He speaks both French and English I believe.


----------



## rotpet

So I just got a quote for a 175’’ thin bezel screen using Black Crystal HG (gain was measured at 1.4).

$250USD for shipping to Canada including duty fees. NOT Express.

I’m also considering adding some spare material just because. You know in case I get thicker curtains one of these days lol.

WF1 PRO Max4k HG (measured gain is 1.5)

room is 30’6’’ x 17’6’’ x 10’6’’ and not a dedicated home theater room.

viewing distance is about 18-19’
Throw distance is 29’
Throw ratio: 2.16 and even more when watching 16:9 material since screen is height limited.

White walls, dark grey ceiling, wooden floors (matte) and 2 large 9’x12’ area rugs. 2 big windows on the right hand side of the room only and not at a problematic angle. I also have curtains of average thickness and can control light pretty well, but don’t necessarily want to especially when I have people over and we’re just watching sports.

Projector is still my trusty non 4k Epson 5030UB and I am planning on getting something new possibly later this year. Something like the upcoming 6060ub depending on retail price.

Cheers,

david


----------



## newoski

Brajesh said:


> Guys, reading about the wavy screen issues and also positive reviews, unsure what to make out. Considering a 150-inch fixed frame PET Grid with .8 gain to pair with a UST projector. Still worth considering?


That wavy screen situation was, from what I recall, one guy and he had the screen in some weird conditions... a really humid room or something like that. All feedback I've seen on XYScreen, other than that guy, has been glowing. I'm planning on purchasing a fixed frame 4K screen in the next few months (once theater is ready for it)


----------



## Brajesh

Thanks, I may take the plunge. It's less than half the cost if you buy just the screen material from XY & do DIY frame.


----------



## newoski

Brajesh said:


> Thanks, I may take the plunge. It's less than half the cost if you buy just the screen material from XY & do DIY frame.


What?!?! That's news to me. What kind of DIY frame would you be doing?


----------



## Brajesh

Either wood frame or stapled directly to wall w/masking around. XY quoted me $550 shipped for a 150" PET Crystal Grid ALR screen material.


----------



## elmalloc

The material is really cheap from the good reviews it seems to be getting (although it's very tough to find anyone on youtube commenting on it other than the manufacturer). I think the quote with frame was reasonable that I was given. The make your screen with material is relatively easy, just get triple plush black velvet from syfabrics for the rest of your wall and you're good to go.

The shipping cost doesn't mean much when the overall cost is still low.


----------



## aoaaron

I need a 186cm (h) by 385cm (w) screen. Do you think these guy can pull it off? Will they provide material or do frame too? 

These secret shippign costs are pretty alarming.


----------



## Hawks07

aoaaron said:


> I need a 186cm (h) by 385cm (w) screen. Do you think these guy can pull it off? Will they provide material or do frame too?
> 
> These secret shippign costs are pretty alarming.


Have you tried contacting them yet? They should be able to make that and they do provide both material and frame.


----------



## aoaaron

Hawks07 said:


> Have you tried contacting them yet? They should be able to make that and they do provide both material and frame.


Yup issue is cost and the hidden costs of importing will kill me 🤣🤣


----------



## sunstrong

rotpet said:


> So I just got a quote for a 175’’ thin bezel screen using Black Crystal HG (gain was measured at 1.4).
> 
> $250USD for shipping to Canada including duty fees. NOT Express.


Hi! I’m new here and I’m just shopping around for screen materials. Do you mean the fabric + frames at 175’’ for $250 in total? I just got a quote from XY screens too, 80’’ thin bezel screen with black Crystal at 645 USD to ship to Canada. It would make sense though if your quote is for fabric only.


----------



## confinoj

I'm considering purchasing a Seymour Premier frame with either XD or UF but potentially replacing screen with the Sound Max 4K material. I really would like their magnetic masking panels but at a 9.5ft seating distance XD will likely be visible and UF is dimmer than I would like. If I did this anyone one know the best approach to this? The Seymour screens use grommets I believe. Can you order the Sound Max 4K with grommets? Thanks.


----------



## marantz545

confinoj said:


> I'm considering purchasing a Seymour Premier frame with either XD or UF but potentially replacing screen with the Sound Max 4K material. I really would like their magnetic masking panels but at a 9.5ft seating distance XD will likely be visible and UF is dimmer than I would like. If I did this anyone one know the best approach to this? The Seymour screens use grommets I believe. Can you order the Sound Max 4K with grommets? Thanks.


I think it would be easier to do it the other way- order the screen/frame from XY and then order the masking panels from Seymour for whatever size screen you go with. You may have to glue some magnets to the back of the XY frame, but seems like that would be an easier solution. 

Let us know if that works out for you, because I would probably be interested in doing the same.


----------



## confinoj

marantz545 said:


> I think it would be easier to do it the other way- order the screen/frame from XY and then order the masking panels from Seymour for whatever size screen you go with. You may have to glue some magnets to the back of the XY frame, but seems like that would be an easier solution.
> 
> Let us know if that works out for you, because I would probably be interested in doing the same.


Maybe an option and for sure the cheapest but not sure I would risk it working out. Below is from Chris Seymour in the Center Stage thread:

"The only way we can guarantee the fit is if the masking panels fit to our frame, since they're an interference fit with tight dimensional specifications. If you do want to mate them to a DIY frame, then I'd recommend getting the panels first and building the frame to fit the panels instead of vice versa."

Now he could just want to sell their own screens but may be hard to know in advance how well it would fit.


----------



## dlinsley

confinoj said:


> Can you order the Sound Max 4K with grommets


I'm essentially asking Gloria this question (and will reply back once I've heard), as I'm considering a Seymour Proscenium frame with the SoundMax 4k. I would think the standard attachment procedure for the XY frame would also work with Seymour frames (but maybe use the bungee rings rather than the springs).


----------



## confinoj

dlinsley said:


> I'm essentially asking Gloria this question (and will reply back once I've heard), as I'm considering a Seymour Proscenium frame with the SoundMax 4k. I would think the standard attachment procedure for the XY frame would also work with Seymour frames (but maybe use the bungee rings rather than the springs).


Thanks. Let us know what you find out.


----------



## dlinsley

confinoj said:


> Thanks. Let us know what you find out.


Gloria just sent me these photos of the XY material - which for DIY she confirmed you can order with the holes and rods ready for mounting.

As you can see, their mounting distance is 4cm / 1.6" from the seam. Jon at Seymour confirmed to me for the Proscenium frame, the mounting posts are 2.7" in from the inside visible edge (not sure if this is the middle, and so the channel edge would be a little less, but you could attach the springs to the posts too). You would need to confirm the measurement for the Premier frame, but it looks similar. So, you need to order ~1" extra each side (so 2" higher and 2" wider, though maybe a little less than that and just tension more) of XY and the seam will be behind the frame. You could switch to different springs or bungees too. At least for the Proscenium, this looks like a fit.

BTW both Glora at XY and Jon at Seymour are extremely helpful. Wonderful experiences so far.


----------



## flyers10

Reached out for a sample and the person emailing me said to PayPal to their specific email address and was $60 for the sample shipped. Does this process sound about right?


----------



## Deanodxb

My XY 100” ALR screen arrived at the weekend.

Will just share these pictures. I have raised the QA issues with XY and they have said it’s likely because there are not many staff working in the factory in February. Caveat emptor. 

I have had an Elite screen and Silver Ticket screen before this and the quality of both of those were far superior to the XY screen.


----------



## kungfuman

Deanodxb said:


> My XY 100” ALR screen arrived at the weekend.
> 
> Will just share these pictures. I have raised the QA issues with XY and they have said it’s likely because there are not many staff working in the factory in February. Caveat emptor.
> 
> I have had an Elite screen and Silver Ticket screen before this and the quality of both of those were far superior to the XY screen.


So did they offer any way to remediate this after you contacted them?


----------



## Deanodxb

kungfuman said:


> So did they offer any way to remediate this after you contacted them?


They are looking to see what they can do. Screen is together and I’ve got it as square as I can so no point in sending the whole thing back. I had to re-stitch the screen pockets so it wouldn’t tear.


----------



## kungfuman

Deanodxb said:


> They are looking to see what they can do. Screen is together and I’ve got it as square as I can so no point in sending the whole thing back. I had to re-stitch the screen pockets so it wouldn’t tear.


Be interested to hear what they offer/suggest as I was considering a fix frame screen from them.


----------



## Deanodxb

I'll post again if I hear anything but my last messages on Ail Express have not been read yet.


----------



## sunstrong

I just tried their ALR samples, wanna share these pics to show the hotspotting effect. I just tried to take a picture with the sample at nine different positions and then stitched them back together. The first is XY screens MF1, the second is black crystal 0.8. I would say MF1 is much brighter, but the gain is slightly more uniform with black crystal 0.8. But black crystal is also too dark to my taste I think.
















Some background info: My PJ is Xgimi Halo + (1.2x throw), at screen size about 70’’. And I’m also projecting from a table so I’m aware it could make the hotspotting worse with this kind of positioning. 

I just thought of this idea while playing the game, and did it right on the spot, so I’m sorry that the images are not the same between samples…could have planned better and used a static image. I also don’t care that much about getting accurate numbers, as long as the viewing experience is good, so it looks rough, but I think it’s good enough to get the idea of hotspotting.

In the end as you can see the surrounding areas of the screen, which is a dirt cheap retro-reflective fabric, is much brighter and overall more uniform in brightness. Also nice contrast. As much as I want a more high end screen, I think this might be my best solution for now, as long as I’m not super off axis. I also have the carls place sample, haven’t done the same test, but I got the impression that it’s similar to MF1, if not worse in hotspotting. Althoguh I heard that Carl‘s Place ALR is better than XY screens from HCFR.

Not sure what other options I have other than DIY…


----------



## Hawks07

flyers10 said:


> Reached out for a sample and the person emailing me said to PayPal to their specific email address and was $60 for the sample shipped. Does this process sound about right?


That process sounds right but the price seems high. I thought they charged like $35.


----------



## da9el84

newoski said:


> That wavy screen situation was, from what I recall, one guy and he had the screen in some weird conditions... a really humid room or something like that. All feedback I've seen on XYScreen, other than that guy, has been glowing. I'm planning on purchasing a fixed frame 4K screen in the next few months (once theater is ready for it)


Well, that's just not true.
That "one guy" was me and my screen is in my living room, like probably most people. I live in Denmark. No weird or extra humid environment what so ever. Our weather is probably as generic as it gets, not too warm in the summer, not too cold in the winter, but my living room averages around 22 degrees C.

And it wasn't just waves, it was a bent frame upon reciept that they just flat out refused to fix, and told me to go bend it back myself, instead of just sending me a new piece that wouldn't have cost them all that much, instead it ended up costing them several potential customers from the comments in this thread....


----------



## newoski

da9el84 said:


> Well, that's just not true.
> That "one guy" was me and my screen is in my living room, like probably most people. I live in Denmark. No weird or extra humid environment what so ever. Our weather is probably as generic as it gets, not too warm in the summer, not too cold in the winter, but my living room averages around 22 degrees C.
> 
> And it wasn't just waves, it was a bent frame upon reciept that they just flay out refused to fix, and told me to go bend it back myself, instead of just sending me a new piece that wouldn't have cost them all that much, instead it ended up costing them several potential customers from the comments in this thread....


Ah, my mistake.


----------



## Deanodxb

da9el84 said:


> Well, that's just not true.
> That "one guy" was me and my screen is in my living room, like probably most people. I live in Denmark. No weird or extra humid environment what so ever. Our weather is probably as generic as it gets, not too warm in the summer, not too cold in the winter, but my living room averages around 22 degrees C.
> 
> And it wasn't just waves, it was a bent frame upon reciept that they just flat out refused to fix, and told me to go bend it back myself, instead of just sending me a new piece that wouldn't have cost them all that much, instead it ended up costing them several potential customers from the comments in this thread....


just curious - when you installed the tension springs did you start in the corners (as recommended by XY instructions) or in the middle of each side and then work towards the corners?

I’ve always worked middle out and was surprised the instructions advised the opposite.


----------



## Cremer Lee

Deanodxb said:


> just curious - when you installed the tension springs did you start in the corners (as recommended by XY instructions) or in the middle of each side and then work towards the corners?
> 
> I’ve always worked middle out and was surprised the instructions advised the opposite.


In fact, installed from the middle or from the 4 corners, both OK. If just one person, then from the middle may more eaiser, but if for two person, from the corners easier. 
For the manual, we just wrote a Common Format.


----------



## scottdvm

I just replaced a DIY spandex screen (white over black) with the Soundmax 4K. The spandex looked fine at first, but as my projector bulb got a few hours on it the image was noticeably dimmer. (I have a JVC DLA-NX7, currently about 600 hours on the bulb.) So I wanted a screen with a higher gain.

I got the screen with the 80mm frame. I wasn't thrilled with how my DIY wood frame turned out, and it looked a bit challenging to mount a non-stretchy screen to it anyway. I did not have any of the manufacturing issues noted a few posts up. Everything was cut and mitered correctly and fit together well. The box the frame parts shipped in also had a black background to go behind the white layer, but I wound up not using it. My only complaint with the frame is that the black velvet on it doesn't do nearly as good a job with light shining on it as the triple black velvet I have on the screen wall. Any bright image spilling over onto the frame is very noticeable. Not a huge deal; I just had to be a little more careful with image size and masking (using the internal projector masking) than I did with the zero-edge spandex screen.

As far as attaching the screen, I did the 4 corners first, then did the middle of each side and worked toward the corners. It turned out fine.

I completely blacked out everything behind the screen before mounting it, so I went without the black backing. I think the black backing would be needed if there were any light colored or reflective items within a few inches behind the screen. It does transmit more light through than the 2-layer spandex did. 

I haven't done any detailed measurements, but the image is definitely brighter (after running the JVC Autocal). It's also a lot sharper than the spandex was. I have to get within about 6 feet to notice the weave; I normally sit 9 feet back. No moire or sparkles that I've noticed. Black levels and darker scenes are still excellent, and the pop from highlights in HDR is back. I don't notice any difference in audio from before (post-Audyssey calibration). 

So overall I'm pleased with the screen, especially for the price.


----------



## Hawks07

scottdvm said:


> I just replaced a DIY spandex screen (white over black) with the Soundmax 4K. The spandex looked fine at first, but as my projector bulb got a few hours on it the image was noticeably dimmer. (I have a JVC DLA-NX7, currently about 600 hours on the bulb.) So I wanted a screen with a higher gain.
> 
> I got the screen with the 80mm frame. I wasn't thrilled with how my DIY wood frame turned out, and it looked a bit challenging to mount a non-stretchy screen to it anyway. I did not have any of the manufacturing issues noted a few posts up. Everything was cut and mitered correctly and fit together well. The box the frame parts shipped in also had a black background to go behind the white layer, but I wound up not using it. My only complaint with the frame is that the black velvet on it doesn't do nearly as good a job with light shining on it as the triple black velvet I have on the screen wall. Any bright image spilling over onto the frame is very noticeable. Not a huge deal; I just had to be a little more careful with image size and masking (using the internal projector masking) than I did with the zero-edge spandex screen.
> 
> As far as attaching the screen, I did the 4 corners first, then did the middle of each side and worked toward the corners. It turned out fine.
> 
> I completely blacked out everything behind the screen before mounting it, so I went without the black backing. I think the black backing would be needed if there were any light colored or reflective items within a few inches behind the screen. It does transmit more light through than the 2-layer spandex did.
> 
> I haven't done any detailed measurements, but the image is definitely brighter (after running the JVC Autocal). It's also a lot sharper than the spandex was. I have to get within about 6 feet to notice the weave; I normally sit 9 feet back. No moire or sparkles that I've noticed. Black levels and darker scenes are still excellent, and the pop from highlights in HDR is back. I don't notice any difference in audio from before (post-Audyssey calibration).
> 
> So overall I'm pleased with the screen, especially for the price.


Good to hear that you are enjoying the screen. I have the same screen and am very happy with it as well. 
Just waiting for my NZ8 to arrive(hopefully next week) to see how well the two pair up. 
A couple of questions: first how big is your screen and second, did you ask for the black backing?
I didn’t receive any with my screen. I wouldn’t use either, just curious.


----------



## Cremer Lee

Hawks07 said:


> Good to hear that you are enjoying the screen. I have the same screen and am very happy with it as well.
> Just waiting for my NZ8 to arrive(hopefully next week) to see how well the two pair up.
> A couple of questions: first how big is your screen and second, did you ask for the black backing?
> I didn’t receive any with my screen. I wouldn’t use either, just curious.


The black backing not belong to the *standard equipped* , but need extra cost. 
As Scott said if there were no light colored or reflective items within a few inches behind the screen, then no need the black backing.


----------



## scottdvm

Hawks07 said:


> Good to hear that you are enjoying the screen. I have the same screen and am very happy with it as well.
> Just waiting for my NZ8 to arrive(hopefully next week) to see how well the two pair up.
> A couple of questions: first how big is your screen and second, did you ask for the black backing?
> I didn’t receive any with my screen. I wouldn’t use either, just curious.


The screen is 120"x60" viewable area, so about 126"x66" including the border.

I didn't request the backing, and as far as I know didn't pay anything extra for it. The quote I got didn't list it as a separate item. It just came with the frame, along with extra rods and springs for it.


----------



## da9el84

Deanodxb said:


> just curious - when you installed the tension springs did you start in the corners (as recommended by XY instructions) or in the middle of each side and then work towards the corners?
> 
> I’ve always worked middle out and was surprised the instructions advised the opposite.


I honestly can't remember, but I followed the accompanying guide meticulously.


----------



## kungfuman

Deanodxb said:


> I'll post again if I hear anything but my last messages on Ail Express have not been read yet.


hi @Deanodxb 
did you get a satisfactory resolution to your screen issues by XY?


----------



## AKKS

Andytrackk said:


> Yes, I've had my new NZ8 for a few days now...
> 
> It's really a great screen. I'm coming from a Elite Screen MaxWhite (which is 1.1 gain), and my last projector was a Sony HW50ES. The NZ8 in medium laser with the DCI color filter engaged (which you see in the screen shots below) is roughly comparable in brightness to the Sony.
> 
> Given that I changed screens and projectors (and I never had the old screen/projector set up in this room), I was expecting everything to be different--and it is. The 0.8 gain vs. the 1.1 was noticeable at first, and I was a little bit worried if I had enough lumens to get the brightness I was used to. I went with the Black Crystal because this is a multi-purpose room with light walls and I wanted the flexibility to have the house lights on low for sports/casual watching. I have black velvet panels directly above the screen, but the rest of the room is bright. I also have a wide seating area and wanted something with a large viewing angle, which eliminated a lot of ALR options.
> 
> This screen is really impressing me so far. There is a bit of a texture and sparkle to the coating...I've not decided yet if it's enough to be distracting. The black levels with some low ambient light are good. My old MaxWhite screen was noticeably washed out in anything but pure darkness, and this Black Crystal does look better with the lights off, but I'm not running to turn them off whenever I turn the projector on. I think this strikes the balance I was looking for.
> 
> Viewing angles are good, and there's a little bit of a hotspot visible as you walk from one side to the other, but I also have the projector mounted at 1.4x the image width, which is fairly close and I expect that 1.5x or 1.6x would help this.
> 
> Ambient lights on:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lights off:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other lights on shots:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/A3mJUWD
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/3bnX5gy


Sean

There are 2 black ctystals on thier website, which one did you order? The first one has .8 gain vs the second one which got 2.0 gain.








Alr Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S | Xy Screens


Looking for movie screen material? Details about ALR Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S, projector screen cloth, XY Fabric on XY screens, Inquire online!




www.xyscreen.com












Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric MFS1 | XY screen


Specialized in Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric, best fabric for acoustic panels, acoustic screen material.




www.xyscreen.com


----------



## AKKS

nielvm said:


> Recently I became acquainted with the company xyscreen from China. They have a whole army of canvas types in their store that you can buy directly from the factory.
> 
> I contacted them because it seemed interesting to me to review these fabrics. The contact via email went very smoothly, I usually had a response after fifteen minutes. It was therefore no problem to get samples for a review, only the shipping costs would be for my account. Unfortunately, these amounted to around 60 dollars. A bit pricey to write a review just out of interest.
> 
> So I asked for the cost of a whole sreen. The cheapest screen fabric costs only about 8 dollars per m². For the transparent cloths you pay somewhere between 20 and 30 dollars per m², their most expensive cloth (soundmax 5HG) costs about 86dollar per m². For my situation (2.40: 1 screen of 2.8m x 1.2m) this came at about $ 100 + $ 80 shipping. I then took a leap and ordered a soundmax 4k cloth for my screen. This canvas has a specified gain of 1.1. Because I had noticed in a previous tests that the suppliers were rather generous with the gain values, I asked about this. It was admitted that this could deviate to at least 0.97. In my case this means about 20% more light, quite interesting.
> 
> I also asked, if I still paid the shipment, to send different samples. Always interesting to view other types of canvas.
> 
> Yesterday the cloths were delivered neatly in a very sturdy cardboard tube. As far as communication with the company and the delivery (term) are concerned, I can only be positive. Always a reassurance when it comes to such distances.
> 
> The method of testing is the same as when I compared different types of canvas to a forum companion. The canvases are stuck one by one with some painting tape and the greyscale is calibrated. Then I check which light output is achieved compared to my existing fabric. In my next calculations, I assume that:
> 
> A kingpin screen has a gain of 1.0
> My screen has a gain of about 0.8 (tested in previous comparison)
> 
> In addition to the gain, other aspects such as the sharpness, the presence of sparkle or moire and other things (negative) are also looked at. I also mention whether the canvas can also be used for 8k projection. I do not know how XYscreen determines the latter, but I'll give it anyway.
> 
> The measurements are carried out with an Epson TW9300 projecting 2.8 meters wide from 4.5 meters. The current milliskin measures about 16.5 ftl on this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tube for shipping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Different samples
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Test method
> 
> *Soundmax 4k*
> 
> I also ordered this canvas in the format of my screen as this was the most interesting cloth in terms of specifications. It has a specified gain of 1.1 and could also be used for 8k projectors due to the fine weave of the fabric. I find this a not unimportant fact. Since you do not replace your screen or canvas every year (oops, 2nd time this year ...), this has to be very future-proof.
> 
> 
> Measurements:
> 21.5 ft
> Gain value approximately 1.1
> 
> Review
> 
> A sturdy, non-stretched cloth that is the only woven fabric. I am very pleased that this is the canvas that I have ordered in large. Since this canvas has a higher gain compared to my current one, I have tried to measure the difference in black value. With my current canvas I measure 0,003ftl at 0% white, with the soundmax 4k I get the same settings at 0,0038ftl. However, if I adjust the manual iris of the projector to 16.5ftl (current cloth, iris -17), I measure 0.0025ftl.
> 
> It should also be noted that the greyscale calibrates much more easily than the milliskin. The latter is actually not designed for projection, but sure, given its price, very nice.
> 
> Sharpness and other things are very difficult to compare on a small piece of cloth. Further impressions will follow according to the whole canvas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soundmax 4k left part of the face, milliskin right
> 
> Impressions full canvas
> Hanging the cloth tight is quite a task as the canvas is quite heavy and rigid. Have just asked the question if it can be ironed slightly. When projected everything seems super-thight, but when the spotlights go above the screen, you see some wrinkles.
> Light output has remained unchanged
> 
> Overall very neat image, the extra brightness is really noticeable. Even HDR films are already presentable in cinema mode (color filter on the TW9300 that takes light away, but creates a broader range of colors).
> 
> The canvas is still slightly translucent, so that the framework of the frame can be seen in very exceptional cases. Make sure the wall behind the screen is dark.
> 
> *Soundmax 5*
> 
> This canvas has a specified gain of 1.2 and has miniscule perforated openings (0.5mm) in the fabric to let the sound through. In contrast to the soundmax 4K, the manufacturer indicates that this fabric is not suitable for projection higher than 4K.
> 
> Measurements:
> 
> 22.5ftl
> Gain value approximately 1.15
> 
> Review
> 
> In terms of gain value negligible with the soundmax 4k. However, the holes are much larger than the woven structure of the 4k. Also make sure that you use the right side with this cloth, the wrong side shines quite a bit. The soundmax 5 is a lot more expensive than the 4k and personally I think the 4k even better.
> 
> 
> * Black crystal / black crystal HG / black crystal acoustically transparent *
> 
> The ALR (ambient light rejection) screens from XYscreen. Although I project in a darkened dedicated space and therefore do not benefit from such a screen, it seemed interesting to me to request these frabrics as a sample. The given gain is 0.8 / 2.0 and 0.75 respectively.
> 
> Review
> I had to get acquainted with the canvases to write something sensible about it. I had started putting up the canvas just like the others and measuring it, but it did not work that well. The results are very much dependent on the angle in which you set up the meter. Putting the meter at right angles to the screen is not so easy because you are in the shade of the meter, or you really have to measure in the corners of your screen. And do you measure such a cloth with or without ambient light? Not easy.
> 
> With the other canvases the emphasis was mainly on the gain, or how much light the screen radiates on a test pattern of 100% white. This I also wanted to check with the black crystal, but turned out to be very disappointing. After much thought, this seemed to me to be a wrong approach.
> When you project with ambient light, you notice that the colors and the black regions are immediately laundered. The brightest regions generally remain reasonably good. To judge these ALR substances, it seems to me fairer to see how well the darker regions are displayed with ambient light instead of. to focus on the clear regions.
> 
> Generally speaking, I can say that the ALR canvases do what they serve: to counteract ambient light. You clearly notice that the contrast stays upright in ambient light, when it collapses like a pudding at the soundmax4k. There is very little difference in projection with or without ambient light. Quite handy if you have a space where you sometimes suffer from ambient light, but sometimes also completely obscured.
> Important detail: the cloths will only block the ambient light that is incident at an angle on the screen. In my case there are 9 spots in a cove built around the screen. This can filter out the canvases well. However, if you are in a room where the sun is shining in the same direction as the projector ... Now, no cloth will be able to withstand this.
> 
> If you look at the gain value of the cloths (at sight, reasons above), the standard black crystal is clearly a bit darker than the soundmax4k. The absolute black is clearly a lot lower, but the absolute white is that too. In comparison with the soundmax4k, white clouds are rather gray. If there is no comparison, you obviously have less problems with this (just as with black values). If you do not project too large and have a light output "too much", this cloth can be a nice addition to get deeper black.
> 
> The acoustically transparent black crystal is identical to the "normal" black crystal, but is perforated and therefore the gain is still a tad lower.
> 
> With the high gain black crystal it becomes really interesting. In a darkened room the image is very close to the soundmax4k. Since the latter has a gain of about 1.1, it is a mystery to me how to get 2.0 for the HG black crystal, but ... we focused on the image and not on the numbers.
> When the ambient light comes on, the canvas retains its beautiful image, with the only side effect a very slight appearance in higher regions. From the above canvases I would choose the high gain version for a situation with ambient light. However, unlike the acoustic substances, I can not compare with other brands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black crystal left, HG version right. (darkened environment)
> HG black crystal very similar to soundmax4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Idem, with ambient light
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darkened room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With ambient light.
> Look especially at the color of the sky. That washes away on the soundmax4k cloth, stays neatly on the (HG) black crystal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black crystal: deeper black, less bright white


Which one Did you order my friend? your review really helped me in finalizing the brand. They got 2 materials 

There are 2 black ctystals on thier website








Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric MFS1 | XY screen


Specialized in Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric, best fabric for acoustic panels, acoustic screen material.




www.xyscreen.com




This has 2.0 gain, but metallic

This one has .8 gain, but a black crystal series








Alr Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S | Xy Screens


Looking for movie screen material? Details about ALR Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S, projector screen cloth, XY Fabric on XY screens, Inquire online!




www.xyscreen.com





Please help me here.


----------



## abettencourt

nielvm said:


> I have tested both and I prefer the xyscreen soundmax.



Sorry if I missed it, but have you reported text results on Sound Max5 HG?


----------



## nielvm

abettencourt said:


> Sorry if I missed it, but have you reported text results on Sound Max5 HG?


Reading back, I don't believe I have...


----------



## nielvm

AKKS said:


> Which one Did you order my friend? your review really helped me in finalizing the brand. They got 2 materials
> 
> There are 2 black ctystals on thier website
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric MFS1 | XY screen
> 
> 
> Specialized in Metallic Perforating Acoustically Transparent Fabric, best fabric for acoustic panels, acoustic screen material.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.xyscreen.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This has 2.0 gain, but metallic
> 
> This one has .8 gain, but a black crystal series
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alr Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S | Xy Screens
> 
> 
> Looking for movie screen material? Details about ALR Perforating Acoustically Transparent Black Crystal S, projector screen cloth, XY Fabric on XY screens, Inquire online!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.xyscreen.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please help me here.



None of the above.
First I had the soundmax 4K, now I own the soundmax 8k


----------



## AKKS

nielvm said:


> None of the above.
> First I had the soundmax 4K, now I own the soundmax 8k


So you no longer hold Black Crystal high gain?


----------



## nielvm

Only as a sample…


----------



## newoski

nielvm said:


> None of the above.
> First I had the soundmax 4K, now I own the soundmax 8k


Why the change?


----------



## nielvm

Was given the opportunity to try it out. Just had to pay shipment and customs taxes.


----------



## newoski

nielvm said:


> Was given the opportunity to try it out. Just had to pay shipment and customs taxes.


And you prefer it? Isn’t it lower gain w slightly better performance in audio?


----------



## nielvm

Performance in audio has always been neglectable (in my opinion).
The 8k fabric had a slightly higher gain if I remember correctly.


----------



## grodri02

Hi,

I bought the soundmax 4k screen with the frame and was wondering if a black cloth goes behind the screen? I did not receive one...just the soundmax 4k screen. I have the wall painted anyway and I have not been able to test it yet due to a long leadtime for my PJ mount. 

TIA


----------



## newoski

grodri02 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I bought the soundmax 4k screen with the frame and was wondering if a black cloth goes behind the screen? I did not receive one...just the soundmax 4k screen. I have the wall painted anyway and I have not been able to test it yet due to a long leadtime for my PJ mount.
> 
> TIA


If wall is painted black, it's not necessary. If wall is white, it is necessary. I believe it needs to be requested when ordering, if needed.


----------



## grodri02

newoski said:


> If wall is painted black, it's not necessary. If wall is white, it is necessary. I believe it needs to be requested when ordering, if needed.


My whole room is painted dark navy, I think I should be OK. If not, I do have some black paint I can paint. However, I dont think I will need it.


----------



## b_scott

scottdvm said:


> The screen is 120"x60" viewable area, so about 126"x66" including the border.
> 
> I didn't request the backing, and as far as I know didn't pay anything extra for it. The quote I got didn't list it as a separate item. It just came with the frame, along with extra rods and springs for it.


Scott, are you still enjoying the screen? I'm looking at the 135" size of the 4K soundmax, and I have a wood DIY frame but I would have to buy the 142" and wrap it - I feel like just starting fresh with a brand new frame might be better and easier. As long as it's not crazy expensive for the frame.

Also how deep is the frame? My wood frame is like 2.75" deep so it sits away from the wall that far on a french cleat. It's 133" right now. If I had a thinner frame I could have it closer to the wall and hit 135" I think.


----------



## scottdvm

Still very impressed with the screen, especially for the price. I don't have the actual quote handy, but as I recall the frame was at least as much as the actual screen material (if not more). Some of that is probably due to the labor cost of sewing the pocket along the edges of material, as well as the frame itself and all the mounting hardware. The frame is about 1 1/2" deep; the screen itself sits about 1/2" from the wall. 

They also make a smaller border frame if you want to max out your screen size. It would have cost me a couple hundred more, though, so I went with the cheaper bigger frame.

If the wood frame I originally built had turned out better, I probably would have just bought the screen material.


----------



## b_scott

scottdvm said:


> Still very impressed with the screen, especially for the price. I don't have the actual quote handy, but as I recall the frame was at least as much as the actual screen material (if not more). Some of that is probably due to the labor cost of sewing the pocket along the edges of material, as well as the frame itself and all the mounting hardware. The frame is about 1 1/2" deep; the screen itself sits about 1/2" from the wall.
> 
> They also make a smaller border frame if you want to max out your screen size. It would have cost me a couple hundred more, though, so I went with the cheaper bigger frame.
> 
> If the wood frame I originally built had turned out better, I probably would have just bought the screen material.


Thank you! I was also checking out the thin bezel online as well. The material is $330 shipped I think, but if the frame is $400 or so you're entering Elite AcousticPro prices and that's local. I do like how the frame goes together though, been watching some youtube videos on it. Will have to think on it. Glad it's been good for you. Do you do much 3D or HDR on it? if so, has that lived up to your expectations gain-wise?


----------



## scottdvm

b_scott said:


> Thank you! I was also checking out the thin bezel online as well. The material is $330 shipped I think, but if the frame is $400 or so you're entering Elite AcousticPro prices and that's local. I do like how the frame goes together though, been watching some youtube videos on it. Will have to think on it. Glad it's been good for you. Do you do much 3D or HDR on it? if so, has that lived up to your expectations gain-wise?


Lots of HDR, which looks great with the tone mapping of my JVC DLA-NX7. (This is in a completely light-controlled room with black velvet covering the front of the room.) Haven't tried 3D.


----------



## b_scott

just got the shipped quote from Gloria - $740 for the 135" 16:9 4K SoundMax with the 80 frame. About what I was guessing. I could save $220 off the Elite screen, but with Elite it's right here at Best Buy or Amazon and can easily be returned if that are issues, and it comes with slim bezel which would be $100 more on the XY (putting it at $840). The Elite is $960.... hmmm


----------



## guy80

awaiting a quote for a drop down 135" soundmax 4k..still using an old Eilte CineGrey 5D, which has too much sparkling for me. Reminds me of the anology of plastic wrap being on the screen, impacting picture quality.
I have a lot of windows but the [recessed] blinds help quite a bit surprisingly


----------



## clipghost

So is the consensus basically avoid XY Screens? What do people recommend for a decent priced good quality 120" ALR Screen?

Also if Vava and WeMax use the same material as XY Pet Crystal Screens but are cheaper...why aren't people just buying from them? Maybe they have better customer service?


----------



## hokeyplyr48

How did you come to the conclusion to avoid XY screens? They’re highly regarded in just about every AT thread. @PixelPusher15 ’s excellent review thread also has some quantitative measurements.

FWIW I love my 4k screen from them and am pleased.


----------



## clipghost

hokeyplyr48 said:


> How did you come to the conclusion to avoid XY screens? They’re highly regarded in just about every AT thread. @PixelPusher15 ’s excellent review thread also has some quantitative measurements.
> 
> FWIW I love my 4k screen from them and am pleased.


From the bad customer support mainly. Sure on quality but if something goes wrong, your **** out of luck?


----------



## hokeyplyr48

Hmm I haven’t had any issues and did email back and forth with them a bit and they were fairly responsive. It’s not an electronic device, so I’m not expecting my screen to stop working at a random point in the near future. Obviously do what you’re comfortable with, but even reading all the threads here for XY screens I’ve never come away with the impression “wow their CS sucks, I wouldn’t buy one of these”. At the end of the day, it was a lot cheaper than the dream screen I was originally eyeing so I took the plunge and I don’t have any regrets.


----------



## clipghost

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Hmm I haven’t had any issues and did email back and forth with them a bit and they were fairly responsive. It’s not an electronic device, so I’m not expecting my screen to stop working at a random point in the near future. Obviously do what you’re comfortable with, but even reading all the threads here for XY screens I’ve never come away with the impression “wow their CS sucks, I wouldn’t buy one of these”. At the end of the day, it was a lot cheaper than the dream screen I was originally eyeing so I took the plunge and I don’t have any regrets.


What projector are you using with it?


----------



## hokeyplyr48

NZ8 + DCR


----------



## HarryL

is the only difference between the 8k and 4K gain? 

going for 130” with Epson LS1200


----------



## Hawks07

HarryL said:


> is the only difference between the 8k and 4K gain?
> 
> going for 130” with Epson LS1200


The 8k has less impact on sound. So if you need to put your speakers close to the screen the 8k would be a better choice.


----------



## HarryL

Hawks07 said:


> The 8k has less impact on sound. So if you need to put your speaker’s close to the screen the 8k would be a better choice.


Thank you for your response. I went with the 130” sound max 4K based on pixel recommendation. I am pairing with the Epson LS1200. I ordered via Gloria and it was quite easy. Hopefully delivery in 2 weeks.


----------



## HarryL

I just want to comment on customer service delivery of xy. I ordered on sept 3rd and received today. Considering it came from China it’s amazing. I won’t have set up for about 2 weeks , but pretty amazed at delivery time.

I also received a Epson LS1200 and 9 Jbl synthesis speakers from world wide stereo in under 2 weeks.


----------



## clipghost

HarryL said:


> I just want to comment on customer service delivery of xy. I ordered on sept 3rd and received today. Considering it came from China it’s amazing. I won’t have set up for about 2 weeks , but pretty amazed at delivery time.
> 
> I also received a Epson LS1200 and 9 Jbl synthesis speakers from world wide stereo in under 2 weeks.


How you liking it?


----------



## HarryL

clipghost said:


> How you liking it?


It won’t be set up for 2 weeks but I will review and send screen shots. Thanks to everyone’s help on this forum.


----------



## Elill

guy80 said:


> awaiting a quote for a drop down 135" soundmax 4k..


How'd you go? did you end up with one?


----------



## clipghost

I have been looking into XY screens for a 120" Pet Crystal ALR, I guess my question is...is there a good video guide/instructions showing how to setup and install on screen? Once on the wall, do they have adjusters for left right/up and down? How are you supposed to get the exact Up/Down area? Need to have the projector exactly where it needs to be?


----------



## Cremer Lee

clipghost said:


> I have been looking into XY screens for a 120" Pet Crystal ALR, I guess my question is...is there a good video guide/instructions showing how to setup and install on screen? Once on the wall, do they have adjusters for left right/up and down? How are you supposed to get the exact Up/Down area? Need to have the projector exactly where it needs to be?


You can refer to this link:


----------



## clipghost

Cremer Lee said:


> You can refer to this link:


I have seen this video but it does not show him talking about alignment at all. Right left up down. He does not even go into how to get it centered with his projector.


----------



## Shark hunter

Just picked a JVC NP5. My basement is still getting ready and I don't have an option to yet check which screen size would work for me.

As of now I plan to do 158" 2.34:1. I plan to buy a 185 inch screen and measure which size would work for me. 

What's is the difference between Sound Max 4K vs 8K version. ? Any disadvantage of choosing a 8K version over the 4K other than the gain drop from 1.1 to 1.0?


----------



## bbexperience

I have a dumb question that may have been answered somewhere...How exactly do you order from XY or even see prices? Is the only option clicking the Inquire button and waiting for a response?


----------



## hokeyplyr48

Yes. You need to email them and give dimensions and they’ll give you a price.


----------



## bbexperience

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Yes. You need to email them and give dimensions and they’ll give you a price.


Ok. That's what I did. Pretty wonky process but we'll see how it goes. Thanks.


----------



## kaaparaki

I tried to get a PET crystal screen from XYscreens and they said they cannot ship it to US. It is a restricted item. Did anyone else hear this?


----------

