Hi all. I have an opportunity to replace my NEC 9PGXtra with a 10PG. My 9 works great, has great tubes, has a 1996 build date, and has performed flawlessly for seven years. In other words, I'm only considering the 10Pg for an increase in PQ.

I have a working 9PGx with bad tubes for parts, so I should be able to use my 9PGx for the foreseeable future. My strategy to this point has been to use the 9PGx until it dies, hoping that the digital performance/price equation would then make sense. It seems every month that digital machines are getting closer to CRT. Because of this, I would probably replace my CRT with a digital machine, if my CRT were to die today. (I know, I'm a traitor.)

Anyway, my question is whether spending around $1,500 plus freight for the 10PG is a good investment. The same money can make a dent in the price of a digital PJ, and my 9PGx has a great picture with BD, HDDVD and HDTV sources.

I recognize that the 9PGx has some value, but the logistics of selling it make me unwilling to factor that into the equation.

Opinions and advice are welcome.

Hi all. I have an opportunity to replace my NEC 9PGXtra with a 10PG. My 9 works great, has great tubes, has a 1996 build date, and has performed flawlessly for seven years. In other words, I'm only considering the 10Pg for an increase in PQ.

I have a working 9PGx with bad tubes for parts, so I should be able to use my 9PGx for the foreseeable future. My strategy to this point has been to use the 9PGx until it dies, hoping that the digital performance/price equation would then make sense. It seems every month that digital machines are getting closer to CRT. Because of this, I would probably replace my CRT with a digital machine, if my CRT were to die today. (I know, I'm a traitor.)

Anyway, my question is whether spending around $1,500 plus freight for the 10PG is a good investment. The same money can make a dent in the price of a digital PJ, and my 9PGx has a great picture with BD, HDDVD and HDTV sources.

I recognize that the 9PGx has some value, but the logistics of selling it make me unwilling to factor that into the equation.

Opinions and advice are welcome.

A guy on Curt's forum recently got a Marquee 9500LC with a bunch of extras for $1200, so for $1500 I'd want the 10pg to be in flawless condition, or at least have flawless tubes. PJ prices are dropping like rocks, so...

Digitals are definitely closer to CRTs, but I wouldn't jump ship until you've had a chance to try one in *your* room on *your* screen for a while. If you buy one unsighted or see one elsewhere, the environment may favor it heavily.

Plus, you have experience running a CRT, which is one of *the* biggest reasons people don't get a CRT in the first place - ease of use. If you've already passed that hurdle, the 'burden of proof' on a digital is higher.

Plus, you have experience running a CRT, which is one of *the* biggest reasons people don't get a CRT in the first place - ease of use. If you've already passed that hurdle, the 'burden of proof' on a digital is higher.


You hit the nail on the head. I'm past much of the learning curve on CRT, and haven't seen a digital yet that will match my 9PGX, at any price. Getting closer, though.

Just don't know that the setup futzing around, plus the extra money is going to give me that much of an increase in PQ. I'll have to fly down and drive back 10 hrs to get it. And as you noted, CRT prices are falling fast, as digital boxes get better and folks are transitioning. Maybe I can snag it cheap, but I hate to lowball the guy.

Oh well, more head scratching.

No question that the 10PG will give you more resolution, visibly, that I've seen in person, but the 10PG is about 3-4 years older than the Xtra. No astig adjustments, etc.

More importantly you'll be gaining liquid coupling. A little more resolution is so minor compared to the massive improvement in contrast, saturation and the elimination of halos.

That said, an XG LC might be a better move.

No question that the 10PG will give you more resolution, visibly, that I've seen in person, but the 10PG is about 3-4 years older than the Xtra. No astig adjustments, etc.


Isn't it possible to add this from a 9xtra chassi?

Anyway, my question is whether spending around $1,500 plus freight for the 10PG is a good investment. The same money can make a dent in the price of a digital PJ, and my 9PGx has a great picture with BD, HDDVD and HDTV sources.

I recognize that the 9PGx has some value, but the logistics of selling it make me unwilling to factor that into the equation.

Opinions and advice are welcome.

Is it a good investment ? Absolutely not. Using the term "investment" implies that you are attempting to put yourself in a position to increase the potential you'd have for recovery of your initial costs. Spending money on a technology that has fallen completely out of favor with the vast majority of technology buyers is unwise at best.
While the 10PG's have superb tubes, and excellent potential to be one of the best looking projectors made, be aware, like all NEC's, they are tremendously finicky to setup properly, especially the dreaded white balance.
I've owned several 10PG's, and I know they can look superb, but recently I passed on a 10PG with clean tubes because someone(a professional, no less...) had "done" the reference mechanical white balance in such a way as to totally rob this fine machine of most of its light output. It was dim, even though the tubes were perfect. Focus was poor too.
So, not ALL 10PG's are created equal, and physical condition is no certain indicator of image quality.

If I were you, I'd stick with what you have. While the 10PG *can* look better, they can also EASILY look worse. If you've already got a great image, just use it.

Also, personally, I think $1500. is wayyyyyyy too much for just about any crt projector at this point in their lives.

rtart,
I assume you are talking about the one in Jupiter. If so, then I could pick it up for you when I come back to Atlanta.

I agree with what none74 said. The biggest advantage will be LC. I find it a big improvement, while others think it is a minor improvement. Also, I agree and disagree with Paul on the price of CRTs. A mint 9" should be around $2500 these days, while the rest should be under $1500. If one looks around the used digital market, then one can find some good deals as well.

rtart,
I assume you are talking about the one in Jupiter. If so, then I could pick it up for you when I come back to Atlanta.

I agree with what none74 said. The biggest advantage will be LC. I find it a big improvement, while others think it is a minor improvement. Also, I agree and disagree with Paul on the price of CRTs. A mint 9" should be around $2500 these days, while the rest should be under $1500. If one looks around the used digital market, then one can find some good deals as well.


It's VERY kind of you to offer to pick it up for me. Thought I'd probably better look it over in person first.

Some great guidance here so far. Always thought that I would go digital with anamorphic when my current PJ dies. However, my current setup is constant width, and I can change aspect ratios with the push of a button using my VP30, which achieves the same thing. The thing that appealed to me about this PJ is the ability to move to a 9" machine, and be basically done with PJ upgrades for a long while. I understand that the 10PG and 9PG share many of the same boards, and that the 10pg can be "upgraded" to a 10PGXtra, using 9PGXtra boards (I've got a complete spare set, along with the ones in my current machine.) The rub is the tubes are unavailable, as I understand, and can't be found used since the only machine they fit is the 10PG. So, if I buy this one, it's done as soon as the tubes are, while my 9PGX is newer (1996 build), and has the possibility of tube replacement. (Though I probably wouldn't do it.) So, that's probably a wash as well.

Saw a 1292 on eBay in Phoenix this morning for around the same money.

Maybe if I quit surfing the web and get back to work.....

rtart,
The biggest advantage will be LC. I find it a big improvement, while others think it is a minor improvement.

Anyone who thinks LC is a minor improvement is either an idiot or legally blind.

Anyone who thinks LC is a minor improvement is either an idiot or legally blind.

That is a fairly bold statement. I have known more than a few knowledegeable members who don't agree with you.

Saw a 1292 on eBay in Phoenix this morning for around the same money.


Be sure you see a 1292 working with the sources you're used to seeing on your very bright PG Xtra before you commit to 1292.

If you're used to the nice bright image, there's a fair chance a 1292 will disappoint. They are dim, especially considering they are a 9" projector. Your Xtra will blast the 1292 away in the light output department...

Be sure you see a 1292 working with the sources you're used to seeing on your very bright PG Xtra before you commit to 1292.

If you're used to the nice bright image, there's a fair chance a 1292 will disappoint. They are dim, especially considering they are a 9" projector. Your Xtra will blast the 1292 away in the light output department...

Most 1292 are pretty bright at 100% contrast and at that setting do not run the tubes as hard as most extras at 75 - something to keep in mind.
Usually they look a little less dynamic as they do get a little less black than the extra, but some gamma tricks with a Lumagen scaler or Moome cards/boxes can help.

Oliver

Thanks to all for their contributions.

I priced a new G90 yesterday. Only $14,995. I was surprised, since I priced them about a year ago and the price was a lot more. Spoke to the rep who said they have a lot of stock, including spares, but they've seen the price of CRT's plummet over the last year. I'd be hard pressed to buy a top-end digital machine instead of a new G90 today. Assuming you're doing a $50k theater, the new G90 fits right in. Will certainly outlast a digital machine, and should not need the 1,000+/- hour bulb replacement at $1k. Course, I'm not shopping for a $10 to $15k PJ either. My 9PGX with 200 hours that I bought in 1999 for $800 was a pretty good deal. Nine years later it still throws a great picture. I guess it was a pretty good deal.

In any case, back to the topic at hand. I'm leaning toward keeping what I have. No doubt the 10PG will produce a better picture, but I'm not sure that spending $1,500 plus freight, along with taking down my 9PGX, lifting up the 10PG, setting it up, etc. is worth it to get the incremental picture quality improvement. (But that's just today...)

Setting it up is easy for you, just dial one number, we are lucky enough to live in Atlanta with easy access to Terry.

Setting it up is easy for you, just dial one number, we are lucky enough to live in Atlanta with easy access to Terry.

You know, I've never met him, although he seems to be an "ATL CRT Legend". Maybe someone (or he) could send me a PM with his contact info.

I've done all my stuff myself. I finished the basement, built my HT, installed and setup all the electronics, and tweaked most of it. I did pay a contractor to set the heat pump for the basement because no one would sell me the gear without a refrigeration license. Other than that, I did all of the framing, wiring, sheetrock, plumbing, finish carpentry, flooring, cabinetry and painting.

Might be nice to have an expert tweak my system a little, though.

Thanks again to all for their advice.

That is a fairly bold statement. I have known more than a few knowledegeable members who don't agree with you.

I liked my previous 6PG but the loss of contrast in mixed scenes and the haloing was a major dent to image quality. Moving to an XGLC was a huge improvement in contrast and color saturation.

I've seen many AC and LC units and the LC's look completely different (better in every way except corner focus).

1292
G90
8500AC
9500LC
Barco 800
Barco 808
6PG
XG110LC and XG135LC

Who are these people that think liquid coupling is minor? Why does every high end unit use LC?

I liked my previous 6PG but the loss of contrast in mixed scenes and the haloing was a major dent to image quality. Moving to an XGLC was a huge improvement in contrast and color saturation.

Who are these people that think liquid coupling is minor? Why does every high end unit use LC?

That LC gives better ANSI contrast and depth in mixed scenes under otherwise identical conditions is besides the point but as with other things it depends how important this is for the individual.

So yes, if you do a search you will find quite a lot of comments of LC vs non LC and some say it is not a big deal and a few even prefer non LC for the sharper picture it gives especially with test patterns or with a PC desktop.

Personally I think that in a completely black room and with a gamma of around 2.5 non LC projectors can give a very satisfying picture, they have a harder time though under less than optimum conditions.

"some say"

Even when you can't see the halos, the light from bright areas is contaminating the whole picture. Those who actually prefer AC for the microscopic edge in sharpness should just go digital. AC units can look good but they don't have the wow factor of an LC. If some people can't see it, that's their bliss/problem.