For those of you have seen the Screen Research CP2 screen in action, did you notice any loss or resolution/detail or color saturation with the CP2 versus versus a non-accoustic reference screen like Stewart ST130? If it doesn't deliver at reference level, how far does it falls short and in what respect?

I am looking for reference quality audio and video. My speakers will not be behind the screen, they will be about 4 feet in front of the screen and the center will be aligned with the mains, above the screen. Room has been optimized for for audio performance (Rives design) with an extensive amount of difussion utilized, including 12 feet of it on the the front wall. Putting a conventional screen in front of this diffusion does affect audio performance to my ears. As such, I'd like to use an accoustic screen fabric to maintain maximum audio performance from the room but do not want to compromise image performance. I don't know if this is possible and if I have to compromise, I will likely go with a non-accoustic screen material.

A few other facts to consider. Distance to the screen will be a little over 13' (2.6 throw ratio). Screen size will be 123" wide scope (2.35:1) screen using an ISCO3 lens. Projector will be new Sim CX3.

"I am looking for reference quality audio and video".

THUNDER,

the following should put the rest the quality of the audio and video for the Screen Research screen. I can tell you what I think of it or of others that have bought it for 1 and 3 chip pj's but I hope you have some faith in the leading people in the industry:


The certification states:
The certification is valid for both ClearPix2 White and Grey, and validates that the image provided by the screen is well under SMPTE .004 specifications, for delivering a perfect and neutral picture:
• Primary color balance (red, green and blue colors)
• Uniformity of the luminance. (shift from viewing angles 0° to 60°)
• Uniformity of the chrominance. (shift from viewing angles 0° to 60°)
• Image definition.

Joel Silver, ISF founder and president, said of the screens, “The Screen Research products are now certified for Flat Spectral Response and White Field Uniformity. Many materials have been tested and have failed since the category was basically defined almost a decade ago… We welcome Screen Research to an elite group of color scientists who boldly engineer screens with a focus on Home Theater!" He added, “The folks at Screen Research should be complimented for supplying a screen that has not compromised accuracy for gain. Something that is increasingly rare these days."

AND


THX certification is awarded to products that ensure accurate movie playback and deliver a home theater experience comparable in sound and picture quality to a movie-house presentation. Screen Research’s ClearPix2 is the second acoustically transparent screen to receive THX certification, and the only screen for which compensation equalization is not required. The THX certification also ensures that ClearPix2 adheres to strict standards of color consistency, image uniformity across the projection surface, gain, and viewing angle.

“No screen we've tested to date matches the acoustical transparency of the Screen Research ClearPix2 fabric,” says John Dahl, Technical Product Marketing Manager for THX Ltd. “Now more home theater enthusiasts will be
able to enjoy the benefits of proper behind-the-screen placement of the center loudspeaker, with no degradation of audio or video performance.”

Plus have you heard of anyone that has the Screen Research Screens complain about them????

Hope this helps,

Larry

I know its important to match the projector to the screen. Because of SR's gain of .95, I would like to know what type of projector (you can say brand, but that's not necessary) is best [minimum lumens, contrast ratio, etc] for viewing on an SR screen.

I happen to be quite interested in Optoma's H79 because of its low 23db noise level. But is it bright enough to light up a 138" diagonal screen?

You won't be scrubbing off lumens because of the SCREEN when you have a unity gain, uniform field of white like SR's CP2.

The foot lamberts measurement at the screen is all that matters. In your case, with the Optoma's rated output at 1000 lumens out of the box, with a light controlled room, and the 0.95 gain SR CP2 material on a 120 x 67.5 (137.7 diag.) screen, you should be able to achieve 16.9 foot lamberts at the screen before calibrating for the room's effect on the picture. Anything over 10 to 11 is state of the art. The blacker or more neutral you can make the room the better? Grey walls are the second best next to black.

Simple Theater,


I would have to look up the specs on the H79 and my time today is limited(getting kids from school etc etc) but I personally have a Infocus 7200 and I know of many with the 7205 and 7210 that are very happy with the CP2 white screen. My screen is 110 diag and I keep the pj on the low setting. I know of some with the Sims HT500 3 chip and are very happy with the screen also and many different pj in between. This in not specs but real life people using the screen today. I will also have the new Dwin to look at soon to let you know how that looks.

Once the 1080p projectors come out and are somewhat affordable I will move up to that(but Sony Ruby is tempting) without having any fear of replacing the screen. The Screen Research screens are made with the newer technology in mind so I don't think you will have a problem with the Optoma at all.

Larry

The blacker or more neutral you can make the room the better? Grey walls are the second best next to black.

I had to have the fight of my life with my wife over colors. Here's the final decision:

Ceiling - BLACK
Behind Screen - BLACK
Rug - Dark Brown Burlap
Walls - Dark Green/Olive
Chairs - BLACK

Thanks for the very quick response.

Final completion of the HT is set for Summer 2006 - so I've got a ways to go (though the interor construction should be done by December).

I have quite a dark room, so white or gray are only a consideration of the black level and CR of the projector. I am considering the Panasonic PT-AE900U three panel LCD projector. Its blacks are considered at least as good as TI HD2 DMDs. Its contrast does well due to its dynamic iris and dynamic gamma. And it is a bit of a light cannon. Therefore, I am considering the gray CP2 in hopes of "improving" the blacks on a 90" screen. I am concerned that the low gain and gray color may be detrimental to the overall CR. Anyone have any experience with the performance characteristics of the gray CP2?

You are correct. CP2 in grey will pull down your white levels like all grey screens will. If your room is light controlled, we don't recommend our grey material. We really only recommend CP2 in Grey for early first generation DLP, DILA or LCD machines (made in the last century) with a contrast ratio of 600:1 or less.

Any projector made in this century is a candidate for CP2 in matte white.

Thanks for the verification. My concern is those black levels. By all the calculations I can come up with for my scenario (90" CP2, dark room, 17' throw) the AE900 appears to have about 26FL. Will using an ND.3 filter not only take it down to an excellent 13FL, but help black levels and CR?

A good ND filter will reduce the black levels by the same amount as the white levels, and therefore contrast will remain unchanged. BTW, how did you calculated the FL? The Panny 900 produces around 300 lumens in Cinema 1 mode with the lamp set to low. This would give around 12 FL (300 lumens/24 ft2 (for a 90" diagonal screen) x 0.95 gain for CP2 white). I would definitely get the white CP2. If you use a colour mode with higher light output, you can always slap a ND filter on if you decide that you wish to lower the black levels. Don't forget that you will lose approximately 50% of the output of the lamp as it ages.

Hi Scott,

Consider the source: Calc Pro on PJ Central. An accurate calc of FL is next to impossible at this stage. I have yet to find anyone who has done a full calibration to give us post-calibration lumens. Have you seen that yet? BTW, it is a 90" wide 2.35 screen.

CamMan,
So the screen is larger than the one I calculated FL for which would push those values even lower. I really think that you should stick with the CP2 white. BTW, the CP2 white is ISF certified, I am not sure if that is the case for the grey version. AVBuzz indicate lumen values at D65 with lamp on high of 384 for Cinema 1 and 685 for Normal. This would be about 300 and 550 with the lamp on low.

Hi Scott,

Thanks for the numbers; BIG help. I can do some homework now with calculator to plan. One thing that is difficult to factor for me is how to manage the half-life output of the lamp. If I target the half-life output to render 12FL, then I have a challenge up front. I am beginning to be concerned that the CP2 may not be the right choice. CP2 is the only product that will permit me to have a screen over 80" wide (14' viewing distance). If I back off to 80", I can consider Firehawk or Graywolf.

Another unique thing to consider in planning is how the Panny users use the 81EF filter. I am disappointed that the numbers you have for Cinema 1 will not make it for the CP2 and my FL target. I understand that Panny users like to use an 81EF filter (along with user settings) in Normal to reach a fairly linear D65. Presuming your numbers for Normal and the 33% loss of light (81EF loss), I can't make my early lamp life target.

Finallly, I'm not quite confident my room is adequately light contolled. There are no nearby light walls. The carpet is kind of light. The back wall is light, but 30' away. Seems like that might be asking for some trouble from a matte white screen like the CP2. I guess some experimentation is in order. I have a good size sample of CP2. I may have to get the pj and see how it looks. Any ideas? If you see any holes in my logic path, your input is appreciated.

Cam Man,

I understand your concern about the FL and half life, but ask yourself this question:
"How many times will you buy a new projector over the next 20 years?"
then ask yourself this question
"How many times will you buy a new screen over the next 20 years?"

My answers would be 4 and 1 respectively. I get excited about new projectors, but not new screens. You may be different, but if you buy a screen to match your projector you will be disappointed when you get a different projector. Buy the perfect screen (CP2) and find a suitable projector to match. That's my philosophy.

SimpleT,

Sound logic and advice. I think the fundemental question I have to answer now is whether my room is light control-friendly enough to use a matte white screen. My only nearby light surface is a 4'x10' area of carpet immediately in front of the screen. Any predictions on how appropriate or vice versa a matte white like CP2 would be?

Just a quick interjection. I have a 54 by 96 Firehawk at home with an HS51 Sony which looks great. I have some light coming in from the side during the day and the Firehawk helps minimize those issues. Recently using the same projector in a dedicated space we used a SR Clearpix 2 54 by 96 and overall I would say I like it a little bit better. The HD looks fabulous. In Raleigh they have the local news in HD and it is a knock out for detail. In addition a white screen is probably better for color quality I would say.At least that was my subjective analysis. Brightness does not seem to be an issue either.As expected the sound through the screen great. We have ordered one for our demo space here in Minnesota. Good Luck Dallas

I agree with SimpleTheater. The CP2 is the best screen. I had a microperforated GrayHawk which I replaced with a CP2 screen. The CP2 screen is much more acoustically transparent. Keep in mind that the Stewart microperfs are THX certified only when the included equalizer is in the loop. This EQ compensates for the high frequency rolloff caused by the screen. The problem is that the rolloff is due to some of the sound not getting through the screen. This lost sound bounces off the back of the screen and causes interference with the soundwaves emitted by the speaker which results in smearing of dialog and a loss in imaging. These are not issues with the CP2 screen.

Thanks guys. I have seen a test published on the CP2 sound transmission performance. Particularly impressiive is off-axis response.

The biggest reason for me to go CP2 with black backing is to be able to reach a large enough screen (90") at 14' viewing distance. This size puts me into covering speakers that are built-in. The fundemental question is whether it will be okay in my room, as it is not a perfect bat cave. I am communicating with SR. They are terrific to consider all factors, and just indicated that they will guarantee my satisfaction. Can't beat that, huh?

Ddingle's (Dallas') experience with luminance is promising, as the Sony HS51 is not a light cannon, as I recall.

I think the fundemental question I have to answer now is whether my room is light control-friendly enough to use a matte white screen. My only nearby light surface is a 4'x10' area of carpet immediately in front of the screen. Any predictions on how appropriate or vice versa a matte white like CP2 would be?

You are about to spend a lot of money on a screen. I'd ask your local dealer for a demo - and see if they have a white carpet remnant they can place in front of the screen to see the effects (if any).

Or if you can find a relatively dark throw rug to put in front of the screen to cover your carpet, that might work.

I think I'm gonna be okay on the carpet since the bottom of the screen is to be about 2+ feet above the carpet. But having a dark rug option can be added if required.

"I have seen a test published on the CP2 sound transmission performance. Particularly impressiive is off-axis response".

"The biggest reason for me to go CP2 with black backing is to be able to reach a large enough screen (90") at 14' viewing distance. This size puts me into covering speakers that are built-in."

You will most likely find out that you will be ok on both fronts. Seeing a diagram of your room would help but many use inwalls at a distance from the screen with no real problems.

As far a off-axis viewing...both sonically and visually I can sit anywhere in my room and not really have any degradation of either. I normally like to sit in my sweet spot in the middle but I have these things called kids that I have taught where to sit and like to push me out.... I can sit to the extreme ends of my room and still get a great picture!!!

You should not have any decrease viewing cone with Screen Research and another plus of this screen.

Larry

Hi Larry,

Thanks for the input. What do you think of image brightness for a screen the size I am planning (90")? Most PJs are landing at around 400 lumens after calibration. The 90" screen is not without design concerns, as the L/R sides fo the frames are in front of part of the two woofers of the Klipsch U2 speakers. It would take a 110" screen to put the speakers fully inside the screen. The 110"screen would render a 36.3 degree viewing angle (I am planning a 2.35 constant height). That further challenges image brightness, although the constant height will help that somewhat. I am also concerned that an image that big at my viewing distance may be pushing the limits of what is reasonable for visible artifacts/PQ. Any ideas from your experience?

Randy

"I may have to get the pj and see how it looks".

I personally think this is the best way to go even if your dealer has to give you a demo for the weekend. I have a four way masking system and can do 2.35 and do not see brightness drop vs the other formats but am using an old infocus 7200 also. I have a 110 diag. screen and see not artifacts etc at both my 10 foot and 14 foot and 17 foot seatings.

As far as your speaker go without seeing a diagram kinda hard to see what you doing but can you move the speakers to tilt the tweeters into the screen toward your seating area making a v with your left and right speakers toward your seating area????

I personally like this to improve the imaging and soundstage of the movies and music.

Larry

The foot lamberts measurement at the screen is all that matters.

Au contraire. brightnes AND contrast ratio are roughly equal in importance in image quality. In fact, you could boost brightness and cut contrast at the same time, and ther image quality would remain the same.

But image contrast is often free if you can make sure that as little as possible in the room that "sees" the screen, can reflect screen light back to the screen and wash out contrast.

I agree with you regarding contast ratios importance. However, I was referring to which spec was more important on a data sheet when evaluating projectors -- ANSI Lumens or the Foot Lamberts at the screen. Although most data sheets won't give you foot lamberts because of the complexity of room and screen size and gain variables, clearly foot lamberts are what you see and end up with.

For what its worth to those wondering about the quality and brightness of the image coming from a CP2 screen, I have a 110" wide CP2 and I just installed the Panny AE900 projector. Out of the box with the projector in Cinema 1 mode with the lamp on high I believe that the lumens is 385(correct me if im wrong). In my completely light controlled room the picture is plenty bright and the image is outstanding considering I havent even played with the calibration at all. In normal mode with the lamp on low the lumens is around 550 I think and in my opinion this image is too bright for movie watching(maybe sports would be a better use). I am looking forward to calibrating the projector in these 2 modes and I will report on how it looks then.

Oh yeah and there is nothing like hearing the sound come from the screen (I have all three behind). Until you actually experience it you have no idea what I mean.

Paul

Paul,

Thanks for the post. I think you are the first to try the AE900 with the CP2, unless I've missed someone else's post. That's good news to hear it is a good combo. What is your viewing distance from that 110" screen? I'm hoping to soon see that combo with a 2.35 CP2 with constant height/Panamorph arrangement.

Randy

Paul,

Thanks for the post. I think you are the first to try the AE900 with the CP2, unless I've missed someone else's post. That's good news to hear it is a good combo. What is your viewing distance from that 110" screen? I'm hoping to soon see that combo with a 2.35 CP2 with constant height/Panamorph arrangement.

Randy

Randy, front seats are 11 feet away and I wouldnt change a thing.

Paul

Paul,

Wow, you are in full-size cinema territory there...at around 45 degree viewing angle. That is really impressive that home technology will permit that now. Enjoy. Keep us informed at you calibrate and get some time on the combo.

Randy

I tried the AE900 on my 120" wide (138" diagonal) CP2 screen last week. Three other AVS members were over as well to check out the combo. We positioned the Panny with minimum zoom (as close as possible to maximize brightness). It is the reduced focal ratio of the zoom lens in minimum zoom that results in increased brightness. The projector had about 170 hours on it. We all agreed that it was actually bright enough in the Cinema 1 setting with the lamp on high. If I were to use this combo I would definitely try to get the Normal mode calibrated just to give the image some more punch. BTW, the first row of seating is about 14' from the screen.

I calibrated the AE900 according to CKLs specs for color in Normal Mode with lamp on low. I adjusted brightness and contrast using DVE gray step screen.

Compared to Cinema 1 uncalibrated, which I thought looked really good, the image is substantially improved. Higher contrast, much brighter, richer colors, and if possible seems sharper(dont really know why).

I watched clips from T2 Extreme DVD and was very impressed it looked almost HD, but I will see the difference tomorrow when my HD Sat PVR gets installed (hello CSI :) ).

Not to blow my own horn but I have not seen as nice a picture in Edmonton other than maybe a Qualia I saw a few months back(too much for me anyway).

Absolutely no regrets on the screen or projector it makes a great combo.

Paul

Paul,

How did your stepped grayscale look in Normal? Anything close to D65? Does your screen have the black backing?

Paul,

How did your stepped grayscale look in Normal? Anything close to D65? Does your screen have the black backing?


Not sure what you mean by "how did it look" but the gray was more gray than on Cinema 1 if that makes any sense. Cimema 1 (uncalibrated) seems like it has a brown tinge to it though ever so slightly compared to the new Normal settings. And as far as D65, to be honest I have no idea what D65 is supposed to look like, I am assuming pure gray, and like I said it was more pure gray than Cinema 1 was.

All of this D65 6500K stuff and big expensive calibration equipment aside my scale is how far my friends and families jaws drop when they see the picture, and now the jaws they drop to the floor. Wait till they see HD tomorrow!!

No my screen does not have a black backing but I went the extra measure to line the area behind the screen in black felt and velvet, there is zero reflections back there.

Paul

All of this D65 6500K stuff and big expensive calibration equipment aside my scale is how far my friends and families jaws drop when they see the picture, and now the jaws they drop to the floor. Wait till they see HD tomorrow!!


Ha! Well put.

Not sure what you mean by "how did it look" but the gray was more gray than on Cinema 1 if that makes any sense. Cimema 1 (uncalibrated) seems like it has a brown tinge to it though ever so slightly compared to the new Normal settings. And as far as D65, to be honest I have no idea what D65 is supposed to look like, I am assuming pure gray, and like I said it was more pure gray than Cinema 1 was.

An experienced eye can get pretty close to being able to say that is close or not. Even with standard untrained Mark II eyeballs :D there are a couple of things that will tell you that you are in good shape. Look at your stepped gray scale on DVE or similar. If it appears to not have an overall bias (tinge) of any color, and it is consistent in that respect from dark to light (not reddish, blue-ish at the dark end while gray in the middle), then you are going to be very happy....like you say, regardless of expensive calibration gear.

No my screen does not have a black backing but I went the extra measure to line the area behind the screen in black felt and velvet, there is zero reflections back there.

Excellent. Enjoy. Hope we hear the jaws hit the floor all the way down here. :D

Not sure what you mean by "how did it look" but the gray was more gray than on Cinema 1 if that makes any sense. Cimema 1 (uncalibrated) seems like it has a brown tinge to it though ever so slightly compared to the new Normal settings. And as far as D65, to be honest I have no idea what D65 is supposed to look like, I am assuming pure gray, and like I said it was more pure gray than Cinema 1 was.

D65 is a white point, not grey.

D65 is a white point, not grey.

Okay, we're a little off topic here, but...D65 is an x-y coordiate (.313-.329) on the 6500K Black Body Curve of the CIE Chromaticity diagram defining a standard of color fidelity. The target coordinates for D65 are the same regardless whether at 100 IRE white, 20 IRE near-black, or any where in between (grays). If your whites are D65 and your grays aren't, you have non-linear grayscale reproduction. Enough...this discussion belongs on calibration thread.

I've made my mind up to order a CP2 for my AE-900 but I have had some trouble finding dealers online. Can I get a some of your thoughts on a recommended dealer?

Thank you in advance.

Dannyh,

You won't find any on line dealers; custom only. John (Bigbaldguy) will ring in here for you after the holiday weekend, I'm sure. Our AE900 arrived yesterday. Hoping to use CP2 also.

One recommedation that I know will be coming is to get it with the black backing if at all possible. This improves luminance and CR in all cases for CP2.

Thank you. THants good info to know. Is SR considered a high-end brand to others?

Indeed...but primarily due to its technology that delivers acoustic transparency far superior to any other...and without moire. Even off axis frequency response is accurate through that screen!. This enables the most cinema-like experience going, as you can place at a minimum, the center speaker behind the screen. If your situation will permit a screen that will give you 32-36 degrees of viewing angle, you can place the left and right behind it, too. That visual and audio correlation makes for a fantastic cinema experience. I'm sure you have a dealer in your area.

Can Man,

You are doing a good job at describing the advantages of the Screen Research Screen.

Black backing was found by most of us using it on a daily basis to help improve the blacks and contrast EVEN if you were using a black wall behind the screen. Now other companies and users are starting to look into this. The big advantage is that both the screen (cp2) and black backing pass THX and ISF for accuracy. I have tried GOM black which is acoustic behind the screen and to me it does not work as well. Plus not "having" to use an Equalizer is a big plus.

If you search the threads you will see that there are happy users with $1500 projectors and $30,000 projectors. That says alot!!!

I have a first generation Infocus 7200 and people with the 7205 and 7210 that have seen my screen with black backing think my picture is sharper and more detail then theirs. Not a bad upgrade.....

With the newer 1080p projectors coming out this screen should really shine.

Please keep in mind that lots of people having bought this screen have had "other" screens before. If you think about it, that is kinda silly and a waste of time and money. If you are looking for a acoustic screen that most reviews and people in the business have loved including THX and ISF there is no finer screen.

Larry

One recommedation that I know will be coming is to get it with the black backing if at all possible. This improves luminance and CR in all cases for CP2.

Improves luminance how? The role of the black backing is to minimize transmission through the screen to any surface(s) behind the screen. This will not increase luminance, which is a function of the projector and its optical system including the bulb. It also doen't magically change any properties of the screen itself. Even a retro-reflective screen doesn't increase luminance, it merely focuses the light across a narrower viewing cone instead of a wider viewing cone, which makes the "gain" higher than the reference 1.0 material (magnesium carbonate).

Now maybe what you really mean to say is "apparent brightness", by decreasing light transmission through the screen which makes a little more sense. You will get the same amount of light off the screen though as you did prior to adding the black backing. If you have a light controlled room, this also includes control of scattered light, so you aren't going to be getting tons of scatter from transmission from the 10-ish% (ball park, as I don't have tools to measure this) making it through the screen.

CR? Maybe. Greg Rogers and I were discussing this about a week or so ago. It is really going to depend significantly on the room, the screen and prjector mounting options, the projector in use and its contrast ratio.

If you want to discuss the CR stuff in more detail we can. I've worked out the numbers, but they really get ridiculous quickly for a room with good light control assuming you're talking about the newer digitals with > 5000:1 CR.

I'm not Screen Research bashing, in fact I've owned a CP2 for about 2 years. John and Kevin will tell you I was one of the first owners of a CP2 in the US, and they even use a term I coined from time to time in their marketing materials. In fact, CP2 is tops on my list for acoustically transparent screens.

John,

Great description!!! What took you so long????

Hope everyone had a nice Thanksgiving.

Larry

Great description!!! What took you so long????

:D

Just let it go, John. ;)

Seriously, I haven't tested it for such, but I will eventually...with the right tool, as I do an ISF calibration. In the mean time, call it want you want, John. It's okay with me. :rolleyes:

:D

Just let it go, John. ;)

Seriously, I haven't tested it for such, but I will eventually...with the right tool, as I do an ISF calibration. In the mean time, call it want you want, John. It's okay with me. :rolleyes:

So you're making a claim without testing? You might do better to test first instead of making the claim up front.

There is quite a bit more I could write on this topic...

Why not just simply report the results with and without the backing. I expect that the results will be within the devices sensitivity error for lumens.

Does that mean I'm against the backing? Nope. I'm against inaccuracy in the name of marketing.

When I ordered my CP2 screen, actually shortly after John did, I discussed my room setup and was told by the St John Group that the black backing would not offer any real benefit. I have a 12" deep bass trap across the entire front wall which is covered in black fabric. I think black velvet along the wall in back of the screen would be sufficient to absorb any light that passes through the screen.

"Inaccuracy in the name of marketing?" Your implication or presumption of inaccuracy has any more relevance or accuracy?

If it makes you feel any better, I'll call what you call a "claim" a hunch. I suspect that CP2 lets less light through with black backing that without. It is pretty logical to predict that there is going to be some gain in net luminance (foot lamberts). Maybe it is manifest in net screen gain; less luminance without black backing, more with. Maybe not, but it is a logical prediction. And let's not get our panties too tied in not over the definition of "accuracy/innacuracy;" or that of "claims." We're talking home theater here for Pete's sake; not flying jets or brain surgery. And give me a break on demonizing a comment on the back of marketing. Yawn...

Scott et al.

When you ordered your screen the thinking was that if you had a black substance or paint on the back wall that that could be enough. Without getting into the above debate what is being found out is that it appears the black levels look blacker and the contrast looks better...

I have theatershield across my back wall and in comparision(nothing scientific mind you) with and without blackbacking; it seems that the above is improved with it. Placebo effect??? I really don't think so. I have shown this to people in the know plus lay people in comparison with and without and "all" seemed to notice a difference in the positive. Even Alan Gouger with another screen material(with black material or paint behind his screen wall) noticed this differenece and has stated so with another acoustic black backing so there must be something to this. I never measured the light coming from the back with or without and don't have the luxury to take off or put up the black backing anymore(it is up for good now). The black backing is an extremely thin material and I guess some light would be absorbed or reduced. I could call and see if this was measured at any point if that is important....

I have tried GOM Black also as I had large sample(leftovers) and to me and others that have heard it the center dialouge seemed clearer with the Screen Research black backing vs GOM. Nothing measurable just clearer. I only have my vertical center behind the screen. I also have GOM panels for the left and right speakers and remove them from my stage like you would a speaker grille(when the kids are not around) and the sound(especially the highs) seem to improve when it is removed.I still do two channel listening and this is the reason for that. I have used black backing in it's place and there is a noticable difference in the sound with just music. I joked with St. John to get it inplace of GOM for my grilles!!!

Just my two cents.

Larry

For what its worth I treated behind the screen completely in black. The walls and ceiling are covered in linocoustic with black GOM over top. The speakers are covered in black velvet and the floor is covered in black felt. I can remove the side panel and walk behind the screen(see pic) and with video playing I get no reflection back to the screen. I initially left my speakers uncovered which were black but even black paint will reflect some light back. Black fabric like felt or velvet or GOM even absorb the light with no reflection.

I really could not see how a black backing in my case would be any improvement, in fact it would just mean that my speakers would have to play through another layer of fabric for no reason.

Paul

Cam Man:

The readings will be the same. That doesn't mean that images won't be more pleasing to the eye (they will) but it will be due to less extraneous illumination in the room. It won't be due to a brighter image off the screen as the black backing will do literally nothing to get more light off the screen.

The sooner you understand this, the better.

Paul,

are you saying your "speakers" are covered over the speakers cones etc with black velvet or just surrounding it???

Another plus of black backing is in my case I use Ribbon speakers and in some scences I can see the metal cages through the CP2 screen. Once I put the black backing or any gom material this goes away. I also have a light controlled room and again with black backing the blacks look better and contrast looks sharper. Paul try getting some gom and just put it right behind your screen. My setup is similar in idea to yours with removable panels.

Just so everyone understands I don't want anyone buying anything that they don't see the value in. Yes , putting black material up and absorbtion to light material behind the screen will seek benefits...no doubt and maybe the difference is not of value. And no doubt the biggest advantage of black backing is in rooms that are not light controlled and have ...lets say a light colored wall behind the screen like on a fireplace etc.

Gotta go ....Go Bears!!!

Larry

Hey Larry,
Do you know if Screen Research will supply (at a cost of course) the black scrim for individuals like myself who were early adopters of their screens?

Paul,

are you saying your "speakers" are covered over the speakers cones etc with black velvet or just surrounding it???

Another plus of black backing is in my case I use Ribbon speakers and in some scences I can see the metal cages through the CP2 screen. Once I put the black backing or any gom material this goes away. I also have a light controlled room and again with black backing the blacks look better and contrast looks sharper. Paul try getting some gom and just put it right behind your screen. My setup is similar in idea to yours with removable panels.

Just so everyone understands I don't want anyone buying anything that they don't see the value in. Yes , putting black material up and absorbtion to light material behind the screen will seek benefits...no doubt and maybe the difference is not of value. And no doubt the biggest advantage of black backing is in rooms that are not light controlled and have ...lets say a light colored wall behind the screen like on a fireplace etc.

Gotta go ....Go Bears!!!

Larry

No I did not cover the drivers just all around them. I cannot see the drivers through the screen even on bright scenes.

When I get some time I will try some GOM behind the screen and see what its like, I got nothing to loose I guess, I do have a fair bit of black GOM left.

Paul

Hey Larry,
Do you know if Screen Research will supply (at a cost of course) the black scrim for individuals like myself who were early adopters of their screens?

Scott, please contact me so I can get this squared away for you. If you have the early version of the frame (beveled) then its pretty easy. If its the newer style radiused frame - then its another story.
LKosova is a trusted dealer who can work with you.

Good listening and viewing!
John@stjohngroup.com

John,
You got mail!

Scott,

You should be fine with your frame.

Paul,

I just read the post wrong....acoustic velvet would be cool!!!

The gom will give you an idea but the BB was better for me and acoustically sounded clearer. GOM dulls the sound by taking away the highs a bit.

Larry

Can anyone tell me where I can go to order a CP2 on the south shore in Massachusetts. I have talked to one source about getting one, but have not heard from them after inquiring. Also, does anyone know what kind of lead time to expect with this type of screen. Thanks. I need to order right away. We will be ready for the screen in about three weeks.

HI ,

You have not stated which CP2 type of screen you want. Lead time will vary. For a fixed screen depending on size about 3-4 weeks. For electric screen about 4-6 weeks and for x-mask about 6-8 weeks. All can be put on rush order and can be had in much less time but there is a fee for this. You should contact St. John Group to find a dealer in your area.

Larry

Has anyone seen one of these SCREENRESEARCH stands?

I think this may be the perfect solution for my room, but there is little documentation for it on the website.

How do the speakers secure to the stand?
Is there a maximum screen size for this stand?

What stands are you speaker of??? Go to www.stjohngroup.com and there is literture there that you should be able to download. I think John Kotches uses a stand for his electric screen or are you talking about the mounting stands for ceiling or floor standing applications. Kevin St. John Leja or John Caldwell should be able to help you with this. I have only seen the pdf's of these stands.

If talking mounting stands I think that you would not attach speakers to it.

Larry

Larry

What stands are you speaker of??? Go to www.stjohngroup.com and there is literture there that you should be able to download. I think John Kotches uses a stand for his electric screen or are you talking about the mounting stands for ceiling or floor standing applications. Kevin St. John Leja or John Caldwell should be able to help you with this. I have only seen the pdf's of these stands.

If talking mounting stands I think that you would not attach speakers to it.

Larry

Larry

No, I'm mounted directly to my ceiling. At least I am in my current room.

Cheers,

Hi John,

I thought I read you had a stand somewhere???

Sorry about that.

Larry

Larry,

Nope. No worries though. I just wanted to set the record straight :)

Can you send me a PM with your e-mail though please?

Best,

I am not sure if this has been covered,but is there a minimum distance the center channel should be back from the screen? I am going to be pretty tight in an upcoming installation.
I recall Dennis Erskine indicting some problems with sonic reflections from the front of the speaker cabinet to the back of the screen that were detrimental to the sound at any distance. I am going to experiment with some fiberglass on the face of the speaker,but should I be more than 1" away? It looks like we may be forced in that close. Thanks Dallas

My speakers are within a inch from the screen with not a problem . Other screens that are not Screen Research there will be problems but not with Screen Research. This is not a perfed screen and there are differences when it comes to this.

Why are you putting fiberglass on the face of the speaker.....that would not be a good thing.

Larry

My speakers are within a inch from the screen with not a problem . Other screens that are not Screen Research there will be problems but not with Screen Research. This is not a perfed screen and there are differences when it comes to this.

Why are you putting fiberglass on the face of the speaker.....that would not be a good thing.

Larry
At CEDIA, Dennis and Tony Grimani found that the face of the center speaker was reflecting the reflected sound back through the screen.This interacted with the original output of the speaker in the room causing a measureable change in the sound of the speaker! Putting fiberglass around the face of the speaker ( not the drivers) eliminated the problem.
Less scientific I thought I noticed a change in the sound of the center as I moved it back an inch or two in a previ ous SR installation.

Interesting....

I will need to e-mail or call Tony and ask.

Larry

Hello all,
I am the process of acoustical treatments and purchasing my screen. I have gone through many ideas around screens - here's my journey.

- Selected screen ratio 16:9, selected size ~123"

- Initially thought I would go with Stewart for a acoustically transparent screen (because everyone I talked to said they are the cadilac of the screen industry). Based upon this I framed in my procenium/speaker stands to leave 116" inches between for the OD stewart screen dimensions(I think the Stewart needed 114" OD or smaller)

- Learned about moire and the disclaimers and horror story around Stewart - decided to look for alternatives

- Looked at both Screen research and Vutec. Both appeared to be good - one certified and one with "great potential". I also was concerned about my silver speaker cones and the vutecs, but it sounds like that may be addressed.

- Recently decided that I would spend the extra money and go with a CP2, but I went and looked at the standard SR sizes and they have a 126" diagonal that requires 116.3".

So I have 3 options:

1. Go for 114.7" diagonal screen that needs 106.3" OD width

2. Order a "custom" SR CP2 screen that is ~123" Diagonal(or whatever would bring it down to a 115-115.5 Width)

3. Take a look at the vutecs (or other) a bit more.

(I also can't reframe my procenium any bigger, due to speakers/subs/etc)


What does everyone recommend? Is #2 above going to raise my costs a lot because its custom? (If so I can eliminate that, as I have already crossed my comfort level in this purchase).

thanks!

Austin

Autin,

For the Stock Screen Research if I am reading this post correctly you have some options.
The 100 wide is 114.7 diag and 56.2 ht.
The 110 wide is 126.2 diag and 61.9 ht.

These are both in the 16:9 ratio.

I think you said you just have 106.5 width or so. The screens can be made custom to a point without changing the ratio of the screen. Is this a face mount screen wall or are you putting this into an aperture???

Larry

Autin,

For the Stock Screen Research if I am reading this post correctly you have some options.
The 100 wide is 114.7 diag and 56.2 ht.
The 110 wide is 126.2 diag and 61.9 ht.

These are both in the 16:9 ratio.

I think you said you just have 106.5 width or so. The screens can be made custom to a point without changing the ratio of the screen. Is this a face mount screen wall or are you putting this into an aperture???

Larry


My maximum width is 116"(but would like it to be a 1/2 shy for safety!

here is the link (http://www.screenresearch.com/documents/fixe_techsheet_revJ2005.04.11.pdf) to screen research's stock options. The actual cloth width is fine at 126" diagonal, but the when you add the frame in(factored in "Overall width") - the width exceeds 116".

I am planning on fastening it to a false wall in front of a center channel.

thanks,
Austin

Austiin,
All you do is add 6.3" (3.15" to each side) to the screens width and height to get the total OD. So our standard 110"wide screen (viewing area) will have a total width with frame of 116.3". So if that's too big, we can make you a screen that is EXACTLY 116" wide (with frame). It will cost you the price of the 110" model, except that you would add 5% for custom sizing/material loss.

Good viewing and listening.
John

Coupla questions for bigbaldguy,

I am considering a CP2 for my new cinema and want to install a custom 15' wide 2.35:1 scope screen. However, I would like to be able to use the four way masking system to create smaller size scope screens anywhere between 15' and 11' wide so that I can dial in the perfect screen size for my initial projector but which leaves room to expand the screen size as brighter projectors come along. Is this going to be feasible, ie will the four way masking allow such ranges to be framed?

Secondly, any comments on the blackness of the masking material. I am wondering how less black the acoustically transparent masking is compared to velvet.

Cheers,

Mark

I don't remember who asked me and which thread it was in but here is how I made my frame and how it looks.

The screen is 110" x 62". I took 1/2" plywood 3" wide and laminated 2 pieces together for each side giving a 1" thick frame. I routered a 3/8" deep x 3/4" wide channel for the J-channel to sit in. This brings the fabric right up to the frame with no gap which you would have just putting the J-channel on the surface of the frame. The frame is covered in black velvet and held together at the corners with L brackets.

Once the screen was installed into the frame I mounted it to the screen wall opening which was framed with exact demensions as the screen. To mount the screen to the frame wall I used inset nuts on the frame and 1/4" bolts through the screen wall frame.

Everyone who sees it thinks it must have been a bought frame or a professionally made screen. When I tell them I made it myself they are very impressed.

Here is a picture which of course doesn't capture the look very well but anyway you will get the idea.

Paul

Coupla questions for bigbaldguy,

I am considering a CP2 for my new cinema and want to install a custom 15' wide 2.35:1 scope screen. However, I would like to be able to use the four way masking system to create smaller size scope screens anywhere between 15' and 11' wide so that I can dial in the perfect screen size for my initial projector but which leaves room to expand the screen size as brighter projectors come along. Is this going to be feasible, ie will the four way masking allow such ranges to be framed?

Secondly, any comments on the blackness of the masking material. I am wondering how less black the acoustically transparent masking is compared to velvet.

Cheers,

Mark


Hi Mark,

The Screen Research four-way XMask or CMask masking systems will allow you to do what you are asking for. But the question for you is -- what native size screen do you want to START with -- 2.35, 1.85, 1.78, or 1.33? With a normal scope constant height 2.35 screen with masking, all we normally do is use two-way masking only to make the sides smaller. If you want us to make you a native 2.35 screen with 4 masking panels, we can do it. But why would you want to mask the top and bottom? Are you using or planning to use a constant height scaler and anamorphic lens combination ? We can make you anything you want. Please write me off line with dimensional specs. john@stjohngroup.com.

As for blackness of the masking panels -- there are two options. Solid velour panels or acoustically transparent masking panels. The acoustically transparent panel option is not a total black out. But it really does not matter. There is a solid 1.5" bar that is velour covered that moves the masks side to side or up and down. This bar is where the overscan is terminated. You'll find that after looking at the screen with an image on it, with the lights off -- the side masking panels disappear within a few seconds from your peripheral view. Your scaler will be turning off any pixels in the area being covered by the masking panels. With the lights on or with no image being projected, you will indeed notice a difference in black level between the back velour covered bar and the acoustically transparent material. But as I said, after a few seconds of movie watching, you cannot notice any contrast.

Good listening and viewing!
John

Hi John,

Thanks for the helpful reply.

If you want us to make you a native 2.35 screen with 4 masking panels, we can do it. But why would you want to mask the top and bottom? Are you using or planning to use a constant height scaler and anamorphic lens combination ?

My plan is constant height/anamorphic lens. The top and bottom masks would be used for films greater than 2.35:1 ratio format or indeed for framing the screen for smaller sizes.

Mark

Coupla questions for bigbaldguy,

I am considering a CP2 for my new cinema and want to install a custom 15' wide 2.35:1 scope screen. However, I would like to be able to use the four way masking system to create smaller size scope screens anywhere between 15' and 11' wide so that I can dial in the perfect screen size for my initial projector but which leaves room to expand the screen size as brighter projectors come along. Is this going to be feasible, ie will the four way masking allow such ranges to be framed?

I guess this was sort of answered already, but I thought I would chime in here.

I purchased a 2.35:1 screen - 150" wide with 4-way masking. I had extra masking added so I could take the screen down to 4:3 and then mask down to 16x9 inside of that. My reasons were twofold:

First, I wanted to be able to mask down for 2.76:1 films like Ben-Hur.
Secondly, I wanted to mask for other projectors that couldn't fill a 150" wide screen, since this is my showroom as well.

We are still in construction with the room about half-way finished with soundproofing. I hope to be running by the end of January although that may be a bit optomistic. I plan on sharing a lot of how it works when finished (or at least finished enough to run).

HI,

I have a four way masking system on a 16:9 screen and the masking works very well with either two way or four way. Just push the button and he goes to what you preset with the software. There is minor setup for that and you can adjust it to what you want also. Very slick and works very well.

Larry

Plan on spending over $10,000 for a Screen Research screen of that size with 4 way masking. Can't even touch a Screen Research screen with 2.35 ratio with lateral masking for 16X9 for under $5,000.

Outstanding product, very, very, expensive for motorized masking versions. :mad:

gman,

Motorized masking? Like there is manual masking or something ;>) ?

Screen Research makes motorized drop down screens with masking. They also make two grades of fixed screens with masking.

If you we're to price a comparably sized masking screen -- fixed or motorized from Stewart with AT material, you'll find that Stewart's prices are considerable higher than Screen Research's equivalent model.

Write me off-line and I can send you detailed MSRP prices.

Good listening and good viewing.
John

Plan on spending over $10,000 for a Screen Research screen of that size with 4 way masking. Can't even touch a Screen Research screen with 2.35 ratio with lateral masking for 16X9 for under $5,000.

Outstanding product, very, very, expensive for motorized masking versions. :mad:

Plan on spending way more than that for adjustable 4 way masking, which is what it sounds like he is wanting. I think MSRP on my screen was $33K +/- and while that sounds very expensive it was actually less money than the only other 4 way adjustable masking screen. The Stewart was more than $3K more than the Screen Research. (Note, I had black backing and the tailor-made option, as well as both RS-232 and IR control and the custom 2.35:1 4-way X-Mask which drives up the price)

When it comes to 4 way adjustable masking systems, unless there has been a new product introduced recently that I am unaware of, the only products are the Stewart Director's Choice and the Screen Research X-Mask. Adjustable side masking is a VERY different animal than fixed lateral masks.

another feature that I think is a Screen Research exclusive is image shifting. It's like tweaking the masks. But with a electric drop down with two way masking the screen adjusts and moves and masks move to the ratio picked at the same time and this is a very cool and affective feature. This is on the remote and a push button.

Larry

Daily work finding with SR CP-2
First,I read a lot about contrast ratio and brightness when SR is discussed. What i recommend to customers all the time to look at the perceived brightness, which is in my eyes more a question of brightness uniformity,like bigbaldguy explained. If one couldn't follow up at this point to understand what is said, please shade a bit the top and bottom of the lens, so that you will loose some brightness there. Then whatch a movie and i'm quite sure everyone will understend directly what brightness uniformity realy is.
I'm sure, i never ever had a screen like CP-2 in my hands before.
It's absolutely ammazing what kind of image quality you can get out of this screen.
Perceived better contrast with black backing
It is realy easy why people feels to have a better CR with then without. The light passes on a high degree through the screen. Due to the nature of a Movie ( light moves around and is not static) with plenty of room behind the screen and even it is black behind the screen you can realize the light behind.
Black backing blocks the light like you have it within the DMD chips with and without DC-3 technologie. The sooner the light is blocked you don't see the light behind the screen and you also will be more concentrated on the movie.
That is in my daily expierance the biggest thing with black backing.

Best
Armin

Plan on spending way more than that for adjustable 4 way masking, which is what it sounds like he is wanting. I think MSRP on my screen was $33K +/- and while that sounds very expensive it was actually less money than the only other 4 way adjustable masking screen. The Stewart was more than $3K more than the Screen Research. (Note, I had black backing and the tailor-made option, as well as both RS-232 and IR control and the custom 2.35:1 4-way X-Mask which drives up the price)

Still investigating the pricing. $33k isn't out of the question for screen and 4-way mask but as I'm in the UK i'll be paying sterling - now, if they do the usual trick of charging one pound for one dollar I will be mightily miffed.

Mark

Mark,
please realize, that the usual price upgrade from USA to Europe is not there.
My distributoin partners in UK getting their products from France.
Please see their contact information below.

Best from Germany
Armin

Gecko Inc Ltd
18-24 Brighton Rd.
S. Croydon, Surrey CR2 6AA
United Kingdom
Phone: 44-020-8603-0480
Fax: 44-020-8688-2491

Hello all,
Other than what appears to be barely "slightly" better acoustical transparency(maybe 1db better) is there any other reason why I would not save some money and choose the the clearpix1 fabric? It appears that both screens offer a .95 gain and are both offer matte white. Unless there is notable difference in material(for sound or material) the fact that the CP2 is THX certified and the CP1 isn't doesn't bother me.

My million dollar question is would I be disappointed if I went with the CP1 screen(with black backing) over a CP2 material? Also are more moire risks with the CP1?

CP1 AT stats (http://www.screenresearch.com/images/clearpix1at4inches-780.gif)

CP2 AT stats (http://www.screenresearch.com/images/ClearPix2at4inches-780.gif)

thanks,
Austin

austin,

I am still getting over the flu since CES so I hope this makes sense. CP2 AND CP1 have the same acoustic properties it is just that with CP1 you are limited on size(I think 100 wide) and it is a different material. You also need to have your pj calibrated to 9500 k not 6500k which is industry standard for video. If you are going to get a half way decent projector or ever upgrade to one then CP2 is the way to go.

Larry

austin,

I am still getting over the flu since CES so I hope this makes sense. CP2 AND CP1 have the same acoustic properties it is just that with CP1 you are limited on size(I think 100 wide) and it is a different material. You also need to have your pj calibrated to 9500 k not 6500k which is industry standard for video. If you are going to get a half way decent projector or ever upgrade to one then CP2 is the way to go.

Larry

Hi Larry,
Thanks for your response. My plans are to get a good projector (maybe a ae-900 now and upgrade to a H-81, or something like that, in the next year when they are available). After hunting around a little more, it appears they do have up to 130" wide screen for 2.35:1 ratio screens, which is the aspect ratio I am looking to do(110" wide CH screen). It also appears they have a small blue tint to them that according to a press release allows the screen to perceive to be brighter.

Link to press release (http://www.stjohngroup.com/blasts/SR_CP1_web.html)

Does this seem like marketing or does it seem like a bad idea. The cost between the two are 2-3 times more, MSRP.

Anyone have any comments suggestions on the CP1?

thanks,
Austin

It also appears they have a small blue tint to them that according to a press release allows the screen to perceive to be brighter.

Link to press release (http://www.stjohngroup.com/blasts/SR_CP1_web.html)

Does this seem like marketing or does it seem like a bad idea.

If you properly calibrate your display's white balance any visible blue tint would be removed as long as the image contained blue; for elements that contained no blue at all there would be a blue tint. The only benefit I can see from this tint is that blue light is often the first to run out of power in a projector and so perhaps the blue tint compensates for this effect a little and allows you to run the projector slightly brighter than you'd be able to otherwise, hence the claim that it is perceived brighter...

I don't think I'd buy a screen specifically with this feature in mind. How many other screens offer such a "benefit"...?

Mark

Gents,
If you lay a piece of matte white CP2 next to a piece of CP1, the brain perceives the CP1 as being brighter due to the extra blue push. The screen does not look blue. Just brighter in comparison. The two materials have the same gain. Just different color balance. While very similar in audio characteristics, the CP2's has slightly less attenuation. As for calibrating for CP1, Larry - you don't set your projector to 9500K or 9300K. You leave it at 6500K and make your calibrations from there.

Hi John,

Gents,
If you lay a piece of matte white CP2 next to a piece of CP1, the brain perceives the CP1 as being brighter due to the extra blue push. The screen does not look blue. Just brighter in comparison.

Blue push has no place in a properly calibrated setup. The push would be measured and removed during calibration, leaving it's appearance identical to the CP2, except for colours that normally contain no blue which would now have a blue tint...

What am I missing?

Mark

Austin,

Go with the CP 2.

John,

I never used CP1 so I must of read something wrong!!! I now have the flu but getting over it. Seems like everyone I talked to from CES had it also.......Conspiracy therories!!!!

Larry

Larry, I think the flu virus was sent in a bulk email to all Screen Research dealers by a competing screen company just prior to the CES in an attempt to keep us home.

The CP2 is also ISF certified. The CP1 is not, unless I am mistaken (and I don't see how they would certify a screen with push).

My flu came from my kid. Not France. ;>)

Mark H - you are correct. Any calibrator worth their salt can make CP1 look spectacular. You merely scrub off a few lumens in the process.

Good viewing and listening.

I really like the performance of the Clearpix 2 fabric. We have sold and installed a couple of roll down and an equal amount of fixed versions. Video and audio performance are both unquestionably state of the art.
In the last couple of days we installed a 123" diagonal roll down. During the same period we installed 2 flip down plasma lift, a center channel lift and a projector lift. All three of us involved were very frustrated with the Screen Research design for setting limits. Some derogatory comments about French design were discussed:) Of the three different brands it was the only one that had a push on push off adjustment control. If we did not have access to the main power switch we could have easily damaged the screen. Although the manual does not mention it the when you release the 12volt trigger it waits 10 seconds before rolling up. On the initial turn on we were expecting (like the other lifts and brands we were using) that it would immediately go back up. It just kept heading south. It bumped into a ledge,but no damage was done before we cut power. Afterwards we had to really be careful on setting the limits to avoid damage. The push on push off does not seem to make sense especially compared to the other brands like Stewart,Inca and Auton.
In addition in both of our roll down orders the screen cabinet has been dented. Shipping from such a long distance may be an issue
We are not deterred from continuing to order these highperforming designs. I am just hoping some improvement can be made for easier set up.Thanks

My first 2.35:1 SR screen arrived damaged too. It left the factory in France on a Friday and took TEN days to make it across the channel to the UK and into London. It turns out the delivery company (not SR themselves) had it bouncing around on the back of a van for nearly a week. When it arrived at my dealers they advised me to reject the screen. Even though it wasn't their fault SR in France ran off a new one immediately which I had within days and I've just assembled it. It's stunning. The SR rep told me his company had tried umpteen different delivery companies in the UK and have yet to find a really reliable one.

One thing you guys will find out is that both St. John(US distributor for Screen Research) and Screen Research are both outstanding companies to deal with . They go that extra mile and beyond for their customers and dealers.

As far as damaged boxes I have speaker companies and electronic companies that I deal with and it seems that both VMPS and Cary Audio stuff has superficial damage to the outer box, whenever I see the boxes whether it's Bax global or UPS ground, Fed Ex etc. I will say that Bax Global is a pleasure to do business with and they will call you to arrange a time and call from their last job to make sure you are around and usually they are very good with Audio/video gear and really care about what they are doing!!!

I am just glad that most of whom I deal with double box their stuff. The companies are not pleased either when they have to take back something and send out another piece either.....

Just my two cents,

Larry

Anyone know what the lead time would be for a 120" Wide 2.35:1 CP2 with black backing?

Estimate 4 weeks, although you can ask and pay to get the order expedited.

My newly ordered 15' wide 2.35:1 scope with 4-way masking is 8-12 weeks delivery in the UK...

Mark

Mark, I think that makes you the second guy with 4 way masking on a 2.35:1 screen. You aren't planning on lighting that up with a CRT, are you?

Mark, I think that makes you the second guy with 4 way masking on a 2.35:1 screen. You aren't planning on lighting that up with a CRT, are you?

No, My Barco 12" CRT is retiring and I will be auditioning digital projectors for the new cinema.

The 4-way masking not only allows me to frame ratios wider than 2.35:1 it will allow me to optimize the size of the screen (down to about 11' wide 2.35:1) for a given projector's light output should it be necessary.

Cheers,

Mark

One thing that gets me nervous when I look at the Screen Research installation procedures is the pi-grip for getting the screen on the fixed frame. It seems overly complicated, so for those who have assembled fixed frames, how much time should one expect to complete the job (first time) and what are the commone mistakes that someone could make in assembling the product.

--SimpleTheater

I insisted that Screen Research send somebody to install the screen...

Mark

We started constructing the screen about noon and were hanging it up by 2pm - and that included 30 mins or more for lunch. The instructions are in colour and easy to follow. Assembly is a piece of cake. The screen even comes with a dust sheet to build it on, a wooden mallet (should you need it) and a very cute trimming blade. Mind you, this is for the fixed version without masks....

Simple theater,

The fixed frames are rather easy to install yourself and the pigrip makes it easier. Any contractor or person with basic skills like putting together a frame can be of help but it is rather easy to do. Your dealer should be able to get you pdf's and be of help for you as well.

As someone asked about lead times:

Fixed frames-3-4 weeks

Electric screens -4-6 weeks

Masking systems- 6-8 weeks

These are all safe bets....

Larry

Ok.. So I am still undecided on what width of a 2.35:1 J-frame screen to go with. I have my procenium roughed in to use a 110" wide screen, but could rework it too support up to a 130"(although my distance ratio would be a bit aggressive).

Interesting enough the 16:9 screens are cheaper than the 2.35:1 screens(at least for j-frame). Here are a couple things I am debating:

getting a 110"-130" 2.35:1 j-frame and I can allways add in a 'matting' with my htiq system thus not making me make a decision.
getting a 100"-130" 16:9 j-frame (saving money) and just reframing or matting it.

My first impressions of this to myself.... (cheap a$$, but what does it matter if I save money and it looks the same?)

thoughts?

Austin

getting a 110"-130" 2.35:1 j-frame and I can allways add in a 'matting' with my htiq system thus not making me make a decision.
getting a 100"-130" 16:9 j-frame (saving money) and just reframing or matting it.

My first impressions of this to myself.... (cheap a$$, but what does it matter if I save money and it looks the same?)

thoughts?

I'm doing 16:9, not because its cheaper, but because I plan a significant amount of viewing to be HDTV - which is 16:9 (1.78:1). If you are NOT planning on watching much TV, then I'd recommend going 2.35:1.

--SimpleTheater

I'm in the process of framing out a home theater room and I trying to decide where to place the center and front speakers. I'm thinking of putting them behind the screen and I've reasearched the clearpix2 but cant seem to find prices or where to purcharse.Can anyone tell me who to call? I'm planning on purchasing a Benq pe8720 with a screen size of 92" my room is small, about 12' x 13'. Is 92" too big or small for a sitting distance of 13'??? thanks!

HI BernieBee,

If you would like to draw up your room and pdf it to me I will be more then happy to help you. Even though you can use different ways to figure distance if you can get an sheet and a pj(even for a loaner) and put up an image this is the easiest way to see if the image will be to large or small. Some like it larger and some smaller so personal taste does enter into this equation. .

Also it depends on what size speakers you are trying to accomadate. I personally like just the center speaker behind the screen and the two right and left in an acoustic enclosure on the sides so you can aim your speakers for better imaging and soundstage.

What is your ceiling height also???

Larry

I just reread your post.....where are you planning on sitting???? If at 13 ft you will be against your back wall which is the worst place you can be in your theater......you will have very poor sound and get no surround informations that will be diffuse.

This is a very small room and a 80 inches wide screen might serve you better. I personally sit at 13 ft for a 100 wide screen and this is perfect for me but my room is 15.5 ft wide by 21 feet long.

You want to be around 1/2 to 2/3 back from your screen distance to be comfortable. Some will say 1.5 or 1.6 times your screen size....

Hope this helps.

Larry

From what I have read the CP2 is my top choice for a screen; however, here is my delima. I am putting in a projector setup in a non-dedicated theater room. Motorized or manual pulldown are the only options. I don't really want to spend the money on the CP2 as this is setup that will only be used for 2 years or so as I will most likely be building a new house with a dedicated HT.

Is CP1 a viable option and is it considerably less that CP2? How does CP1 or CP2 handle ambient light as this is not a dedicated theater and could be subject to it at times. Screen size will be in the 90 to 100 inch range. Also considering 2.35:1 but may start out basic with 16:9 as this will be my first projector.

The other option in in-ceiling F/C/R speakers for HT (Boston VRI 595's or Theil Powerpoint 1.2's) with a standard screen. Guess I am just looking for someone to push me in the right direction.

Thanks

From what I have read the CP2 is my top choice for a screen; however, here is my delima. I am putting in a projector setup in a non-dedicated theater room. Motorized or manual pulldown are the only options. I don't really want to spend the money on the CP2 as this is setup that will only be used for 2 years or so as I will most likely be building a new house with a dedicated HT.

Is CP1 a viable option and is it considerably less that CP2? How does CP1 or CP2 handle ambient light as this is not a dedicated theater and could be subject to it at times. Screen size will be in the 90 to 100 inch range. Also considering 2.35:1 but may start out basic with 16:9 as this will be my first projector.

The other option in in-ceiling F/C/R speakers for HT (Boston VRI 595's or Theil Powerpoint 1.2's) with a standard screen. Guess I am just looking for someone to push me in the right direction.

Thanks

The motorized screen uses the CP2 which is stiff enough not to need tensioning. The CP1 cannot be used as a motorized screen.

Like everything else in HT, you can sell your screen and move up when the time comes, or simply take it with you, as it is not difficult to transport.

I just have a problem selling anything for 30% of what I paid for it thus I'll just have more useless outdated equipment in the closet.

Any ideas on how CP2 performs in low ambient light. I was thinking I might want a little higher gain screen.

Yes, I share you sentiment (who doesn't), but then again, I would take my screen with me as my new theater would most likely need the same type of screen.

As for the gain, I would not suggest this or any other screen unless you do proper calculation to determine what you need. It is slightly less brighter than an typcial neutral gain screen, except that it has a certain "characteristic" that I appreciate. How bright is your projector?

I plan to go to a fixed screen in the future so taking it with me is not a real consideration.

I have not decided on the projector as the screen seems to be my biggest obstical. Was looking at the Optoma HD78DC3 or HD72 which I have not been able to see in person, one of the new lower end RUNCO 720P units, the new Yamaha LPX-830 ? once my dealer gets one in for me to look at as I was considering the LPX-510, or the Sony HS-51A. My thought is to pic the projector that works best with the screen. Fan noise will also be a factor for me as little things like that drive me nuts.

spann-man,

Best thing to do is determine what size screen you want then get a projector bright enough for that, or choose a screen size based on the projector you will use. It's kind of hard to give any recommendation here, but I prefer a slightly brighter projector with my SR screen because there is a benefit to the weave material in that instance. I would like it even if I did not need the acoustic transparency.

Span-man,

You need to decide what type of look and feel of a theater you want. I am not a big fan of in ceiling speakers for home theater. They are hard to aim at your listening positions and hard to get a good impact for movies. Triad tends to due a good job at this for inwall though....

As far as type of screen.......If you are going to buy a screen now and then plan on not keeping it that is your choice. If there is anyway you can do a fixed screen now then you would not have to sell it in the future and might be the wiser choice.....it is sad and funny to me how many people buy and sell their screen a couple years later to get a SR Screen but you should not have a problem sellling it if needed but I would try to avoid the whole situation to begin .

With Sr the brighter the pj the better but it works with all types of pj's. Many have Infocuses 4805 all the way through the Infocus 777 and are very happy. Some have the Sim 500ht and others have Canons and Dwins etc etc and all seems very happy.

Get your ft. lamberts in the 12-16 range and you will be happy.

Larry

Can anyone explain why a 2.35:1 J Frame more expensive than a 16:9 J-Frame at the same width? Is there a reason why I wouldn't just order the 16:9 version and frame it as a 2.35:1?

thx,
Austin

Can anyone explain why a 16:9 J Frame more expensive than a 2.35:! J-Frame at the same width? Is there a reason why I wouldn't just order the 16:9 version and frame it as a 2.35:1?

thx,
Austin

If the width of the screen is the same, then the frame has to be larger to accomodate the larger height of the 16:9 screen. I don't understand your second question as that would cost you more money - you just said that the 16:9 costs more.

--SimpleTheater

I meant to say the 2.35:1 screen is more expensive than the 16:9..... I will edit the post.

:)

I was planning on putting all three front speakers behind my screen, but it just dawned on me - the frame! If my L/R speakers are floor standing, and the screen starts 2' from the floor, the frame will be partially in front of the speakers.

a) Is this so minor as to be not important?

b) Should I start thinking about bookshelf speakers that will sit on a stand?

c) Should I build a platform to put the speakers on?

d) Should I put my speakers to the outside of the screen (but that would be within 20" of a wall)?

--SimpleTheater

This is a good question - what is the optimal position of the speaker behind the screen?

I see three options:

1 - ensure tweeters are at ear height
2 - ensure tweeters are in vertical middle of screen
3 - tweeters are wherever they are - ie speakers are floorstanding

My current setup uses option 2 but I wonder if option 1 is more correct...

Mark

I have all my speakers at ear height behind the stage with only the center speaker behind the screen and the right and left speaker behind an acoustically enclosure with them at proper angles pointed toward the listening area for better imaging and soundstage. My frame is just between the neopanel and the lower woofer. Yes proper placement is crucial for the best sound in any setup. I have floorstanding speakers with the center in "vertical" not horizontal placement and the sound is glued to the screeen.

If you need to build a platform then do it but some speakers will lose their bass response and impact and slam by doing so , so knowing what speakers you have would help.

Being 20 inches from the wall can "help" some speakers so again knowing what type and model of your speakers would help to help you.

Larry

Just wanted to chime in and say hey, we love our SR screen and are so glad we purchased it (8 months old now). If you have any questions and would like to speak to a happy customer (not a sales rep) please shoot us over a PM or email. You can check out our scren on our website.

Larry was great to work with, so don't hesitate at all to chat with him, he's really open about that.

Larry,

I don't have speakers yet. I was planning on getting the Definitive Mythos One's for L/R duty, but the frame question made me realize Definitive doesn't have a great bookshelf.

I was looking into the PSB Platinum M2, which are fantastic bookshelf speakers, but cost a bit more money.

Thanks,
SimpleTheater

ST, does the Mythos have drivers that low? My friend has the BP3000TL and the bottom 2 1/2 feet or so just have the side firing woofers. The screen frame certainly isn't a problem for side firing woofers. I also have side firing woofers in my Genesis 6.1 towers.

ST, does the Mythos have drivers that low? My friend has the BP3000TL and the bottom 2 1/2 feet or so just have the side firing woofers. The screen frame certainly isn't a problem for side firing woofers. I also have side firing woofers in my Genesis 6.1 towers.

The Mythos line doesn't have side firing woofers, but they do have two forward facing bass radiators (in addition to the woofers). Since my sub will handle anything below 80 hz, they may not be used during playback of material. They do sit about a foot from the bottom, so one will be just below the SR frame, the other will be just about square with the frame.

They are so pretty that I would love to flank the screen with them, as long as being 20" from the wall doesn't cause unwanted problems.

--SimpleTheater

Thanks Echo,

Simpletheater,

I use VMPS audio ribbon speakers with side firing woofers, two floor facing passive radiators and a lower woofer under the three neopanels.

The way I set any speakers up with anything below the screen is to use some GOM 701 black acoustic material "under" the screen to the floor. When using a Supreme/ masking system this meshes very well and dissapears when the lights go out.

Larry

The way I set any speakers up with anything below the screen is to use some GOM 701 black acoustic material "under" the screen to the floor. When using a Supreme/ masking system this meshes very well and dissapears when the lights go out.


Larry,

That's what I'm planning on doing, but the FRAME is 3 1/2" of aluminum - not exactly an acoustically transparent material. If the speaker is firing a driver directly into that frame how screwed up will that make my acoustics?

I am heavily leaning towards moving the Mythos One's to the outside of the screen. While I might lose some of the theater experience, I will gain imaging and get to see those beautiful speakers (even if I get them in black). By using the toe-in method, I should be able to increase focus and any interference with the walls. Of course I will run all acoustic measurements before making any final placement decisions.

--SimpleTheater

It depends alot on what driver etc. In reality you will not lose much if it is covering only a small portion of the driver. You could do measurements before and after but what you will cause might be "rattle" when your speakers go low and loud. Having the speakers slightly away from the frame and then screwing the frame in very well should make this go away.

Moving the speakers and only having the center behind the screen gains alot. Imaging is more a product of music then movies since it is not mixed that way in postproduction but...every movie I have seen besides "The Red Balloon" have music. Also soundstage is better with better toeing of the speakers etc etc.

My stage hides the front three speakers from view and all you see is the stage (cherry) and stage wall(black) and the screen but my speakers are angled etc and can get a very high end audiophile feel when I take off the acoustic panels to expose the speakers(left and right) to listen to two channel.

Again, it is always best to not block any drivers but we don't live in a perfect world. I would do what every I could to prevent it like raising the speakers or raising/ lowering the screen to make it work out. I have one person that it just touches the edge of the speaker with no ill effects that are audible. My own situation is very similar to yours again with no ill effects that are audible.

Hope that helps,

Larry

My dealer recently ordered a ClearPix2 for me. Eager to see it in action!

no message.

Screen research just announced a new curved screen

Bump. Any info on the use and advantages of the new curved screen over other SR screens? is this in CP2, in 16:9 or 2:35.1 AR? Thanks
mark

A curved screen prevents pin-cushsioning with an anamorphic lens. When you use a lens to go from 16:9 to 2:35 the lens causes that distortion. If you have a curved screen then it matches the geometry of the projected image. The rise of constant height is why curved screens are becoming more popular and the cool look too. I you are not doing constant height, you should not get a curved screen.

Thanks Bulldogger!! Now it seems the 2.35:1 constant height is popular---separate form on AVS in fact!. But for HDTV or movies that are 16:9 OAR, it seems the 2.35:1 screen AR might not be a good idea??? So if someone gets a projector that allows 2.35:1 by lens options or electronically making it 2.35:1 display, is a 16:9 screen with or without masking a good idea with CP2 screen? Right now I haven't decided what my new projector will be to replace my NEC XG 135 CRT.

Does not seem to be any way around masking. I plan to buy a the JVC RS1 and use a Panamorph or other such lens to go to 2:35. My next screen will be 2:35 since I watch mostly movies in my theater. However, I plan to have masking to allow the screen to go to 16:9 aspect. I think 2:35 is the direction that most high-end theaters are going. Once you see it in a home, properly set-up, I do not believe you will want anything else.

Hi Bulldogger,
Are you going with the curved 2.35:1 screen? What is the deal with the panamorph lens, do you have to manually switch between the stock lens of JVC and the panamorph type lens when watching 16:9 vs 2.35:1 sources?

bump

Bump

how would you consider the screen brigthness of the CP2 ?

would an RS1 handle a curved CP2 160wide scope format, ISCO, black room ?

by my experience the SR EAT light...

CP2 gain is quoted at 0.95. If your projector is bright enough to get to the light output you desire then the fact that CP2 is negative gain is moot. In an all-black room you can get away with much lower peak white levels making it easier on the projector. In my room I started with 12fL but that was painfully bright - I currently run at 7fL and even then the brightest scenes can seem strikingly bright.

As to whether the RS1 can drive a 160" screen, calculate the lumens required for a 16:9 screen and then factor in another 5% light loss or so for the ISCO as it stretches to 2.35:1 If you can achieve your target comfortably then you should be fine. Don't forget to also consider the bulb aging as your light level will drop off significantly over the first few hundred hours.

Mark

hi
thanks for the comment. well it seems the gain is really well below the 0.95...
I like the screen when seen with big machines like bright Runco 3DLP.
But i have doubts with pjs outputting only 500-700ansi.... I think 12FTL remains too low for that "snap", punchy image. ...

quite impressive screen you have but you have a bright dlp !!

rgds

hi
thanks for the comment. well it seems the gain is really well below the 0.95...


Do you have any references which confirms this?


But i have doubts with pjs outputting only 500-700ansi....


It's all down to screen size of course. 700 would be fine on smaller screens but I think it will be struggling on a 160" screen. It would probably be fine with new bulbs but once they start to age you will get a dim image.


I think 12FTL remains too low for that "snap", punchy image. ...


I think once you live with an image in a fully light controlled room you will see that 12fL is actually TOO bright and that you can get that snappy, punchy, image with less output.


quite impressive screen you have but you have a bright dlp !!


I selected a projector capable of sustaining 12fL on my screen after it's bulb had aged to 50% of it's light output. This meant, for my screen, I needed to start somewhere around 1600 lumens...

Mark

hi Mark

thanks for the comments.
www.ultimateavmag.com
http://ultimateavmag.com/accessories/605clearpix/index2.html
scroll down to his measures inthe end.

personally each time i saw the CP2 with a big Runco DLP, the image was superbe, no structure, lots of brigthness.
But I won't have that kind of light canon (which was certainl more than 1000ansi calibrated).
Now microperforations even without gain are also sensitive to FTL: to high and the perforations or structure becme a bit visible (i dont know yet at which FTL). or a gain (which is paint), same effect: snap but visibility (of the paint mainly)
So the FTL level is crucial.

I wouldnt hesitate to advise a "large" CP2 with a brigthness-capable projector (dlp dila).
But large screen and something that outputs 500-700ansi... (which is my case)

Yourself you went for a bright machine

now the HD1 was shown in Europe on non perf 400cm wide screen 16/9 and no one complained (probably because of the massive on off contrast ratio ?)

hi Mark

thanks for the comments.
www.ultimateavmag.com
http://ultimateavmag.com/accessories/605clearpix/index2.html
scroll down to his measures inthe end.

Thanks for the link - the interesting comment here is: "I determined that the ClearPix2 provided about 62% of the brightness of the Studiotek, which yields a gain of 0.83. Of course, this assumes that the Studiotek actually has a gain of 1.3, which I am presently unable to determine experimentally." - It suggests that gain is lower th 0.95 but that the method of determining gain is not verified so it could be higher (or lower!) than the measured figure. I guess the thing to do here is assume the lower figure; at least that way you will have more light available than if you go with 0.95 and find out it really is lower.

Now microperforations even without gain are also sensitive to FTL: to high and the perforations or structure becme a bit visible (i dont know yet at which FTL). or a gain (which is paint), same effect: snap but visibility (of the paint mainly)
So the FTL level is crucial.

With new bulbs I was able to get 18fL out of the projector, from a 26' throw, and I could not see any perforation once I was more than about 6' away. I would suggest that at my seating position of 16' the perforations would never be visible no matter how bright the projector - the holes are simply too small.

My previous screen was a StewarTek 1.3 and with this screen I could clearly see perforations from my seating position of 12' back. I think seating distance is actually the more important factor here - if you sit too close you will see the holes.


But large screen and something that outputs 500-700ansi... (which is my case)

And that is before calibration - your light output will drop further. It does seem that, for a 160" screen, you will need a screen with gain.

Have you tried the Theater Calculator at http://www.carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/ - you could input your screen size requirements and see what lumens numbers you get?

Cheers,

Mark

hi Mark
thanks for the carlton link didnt know it

i just read a pdf at Stewart site where they analyse wooven fabric and mp material. without mentioning SR directly.
Do you use the black SR scrim behind your screen ?

Indeed seating distance is a determining factor in an MP installation. here i see the screen even at 5meters away. but it's bright.

Now at Stewart site they also have a nice paper on the advtange of going with curved screen when cinemascope format is considered: you gain more light back to the viewers and this might help witthe SR indeed. perhaps this is one reason also why SR now only mostly make demos with the curved models.
(it also helps the pin cussion effect of course).

I'm not concerned about the audio since i equalize and i use horns cinema speakers 100db in sensitivity and they are good at perforating the screen :D

cheers
Dave

hi Mark
i just read a pdf at Stewart site where they analyse wooven fabric and mp material. without mentioning SR directly.

Yeah that document has been discussed here before. Personally, I'd take anything published by a company which promotes it's own products above the rest with a healthy dose of skepticism. But having said that there are definitely areas for further testing on all types of screens.

Do you use the black SR scrim behind your screen ?

I do. And further to that the walls behind the screen are all blacked out too. I didn't intend to use the scrim until I saw the amount of light which passes through the screen and became concerned about light reflecting back through and causing ghosting.


Indeed seating distance is a determining factor in an MP installation. here i see the screen even at 5meters away. but it's bright.


With my StewartTek I only noticed the holes during the brightest moments or in hot spots of white light such as car head lamps. It never really distracted me, but I do appreciate not seeing any holes on the new screen and wouldn't like to go back.


Now at Stewart site they also have a nice paper on the advtange of going with curved screen when cinemascope format is considered: you gain more light back to the viewers and this might help witthe SR indeed. perhaps this is one reason also why SR now only mostly make demos with the curved models.
(it also helps the pin cussion effect of course).

Curved screens do indeed reflect more light to the audience and help with pincushion on anamorphic lenses, however the fact that they focus light back towards the centre of the audience means that they have less of wide angle of viewing which could be a problem. There is also the potential to hot spot on the image. And then there are acoustic issues too.


I'm not concerned about the audio since i equalize and i use horns cinema speakers 100db in sensitivity and they are good at perforating the screen :D

Movie soundtracks have limited information in the higher frequencies any way, so the screen deficiencies tend not to be such a problem. If you play music through the screen you will probably notice more issues.

Mark

The reason why we show TheaterCurved Screen Research screen in demo latesly is because dealers are asking to see it. It's our newest product.

But the biggest reason why we show TheaterCurve at our demos of late is that it's just plain friggin' cool! It really draws you into the movie that much quicker too.

As Mark correctly mentions -- correctly engineered curved screens can help mitigate pin cushioning effects when the anamorohic lens is being used to close to the screen.

It is incorrect to say however, that there is the possibility of hot spotting with a Screen Research TheaterCurved screen. The 0.95 gain struture was a purposeful design decision to prevent hot spotting from happening.

The acoustically transparent nature of CP2 also prevents acoustic hot-spotting. This can occur with a solid screen when curved. It can act as a parabolic reflector in the room thus causing reflected energy to be focused into a tighter point to a few listeners seated it the middle of the room.

My theater has been up and running (although I'm never satisfied) since around December 06. I LOVE my Screen research CP2. It provides a great picture from my Sony 1080p projector and my front speakers sound as if there is nothing in front of them! Well worth the expense....and as we all know the CP2 is not cheep.....

bump

I am considering installing a HT with the new Infocus IN82 1080P projector.

The screen will be eithe 100 or 110 inches wide in a 16 x 9.

http://www.infocus.com/upload/library/datasheet/english/infocus_in82_datasheet_en.pdf

The projector specs are in the link above.

My room is not completly light controled in the day .... but not all that bad.

Would the CP2 provide me with bright enough image?

I am considering installing a HT with the new Infocus IN82 1080P projector.

The screen will be eithe 100 or 110 inches wide in a 16 x 9.

http://www.infocus.com/upload/library/datasheet/english/infocus_in82_datasheet_en.pdf

The projector specs are in the link above.

My room is not completly light controled in the day .... but not all that bad.

Would the CP2 provide me with bright enough image?

While I didn't look at your projector specs or ask how much light you think you have in your room or get out my sliderule to calculate a screen choice for you, my overall opinion of my CP2 is that it is a GREAT screen! Expensive, for sure.....but I love the picture and the way my sound comes right through it - crisply. I have a 1080P Sony projector in my dedicated theater with complete ambient light control. My choice was a bit easier with total light control because gain value was not a factor. I demo'd a Stewart gray and fire hawk (as I narrowed it down to those 2 plus the CP2). No matter what Stewart, their retailers, fans and anyone else says, you CAN see those little holes in their "transparent" screens........The CP2 would be my choice again and again......

Rich51567

Thats for the input, the Infocus IN 82 specs are

Native Resolution Full HD 1080p (1920 x 1080)
Display Technology DarkChip3 DLP® by Texas Instruments
7-segment (RGBRGBndG) color wheel
Brightness Video Optimized 1500 Max ANSI lumens (1200 typical)
SMPTE brightness up to 14.75 ft (4.5m) diagonal/1.0 gain screen
Contrast Ratio 4000:1 native (Max 12000:1 using iris)
Video Processing Digital Natural Expression™ (DNX) by Pixelworks™ 10-bit video decoder with Motion- Adaptive De-Interlacing, Rich Color Processing, Video Enhancement Processing, Noise Reduction
Color Features Up to 1.07 billion displayable colors with Deep Color™ (requires HDMI 1.3 source)
Texas Instruments BrilliantColor™
Preset color gamma tables optimized by source-type
Individually adjustable RGB colors
Advanced Features Automatic black level calibration, Digital vertical image shift, InFocus Color Gamut Calibrator utility support, ISF Day/Night modes (requires ISF Certified Calibration by professional installer)
Lamp Life and Type 2500 hrs (2000 hrs normal mode), 300W UHP
Compatibility 1080p/60/50/30/24, 1080i/60/50/35/24, 720p, 576p, 576i, 480p, 480i
NTSC, PAL, SECAM, VESA, SXGA, XGA, SVGA, VGA
Digital Keystone Correction ±13° Vertical
I/O Connections (1) HDMI (version 1.3) with HDCP
(1) Component Video, YPbPr/RGBHV, RCA
(1) Composite Video, RCA
(1) S-Video, 4-pin mini DIN
(1) Auxiliary input for 2nd video source (HDMI 1.3, DVI, VGA, or Component), M1-DA
(2) 12V screen/aspect ratio trigger, 3.5mm mini jack
(1) IR repeater input, Niles/Xantech compatible 3.5mm mini jack
(1) RS232, male DB9
Projection Lens Manual 1.2x zoom, F 2.6 - 2.8, f 39.1 - 46.9m, 136% offset
Threaded focus ring for 72mm neutral density filter (available separately)
Throw Ratio 1.85 - 2.22:1 (Distance/Width)
Aspect Ratio 16:9 (native), 4:3, 2.35:1 widescreen (requires anamorphic lens, available separately)
Projection Modes Ceiling mount (built-in ceiling-mode sensor) and tabletop, using swivel base (included)
Projection Distance 4.92’ - 32.8’ (1.5m - 9.9m)
Audible Noise 30 dB (33 dB normal mode)
Power Consumption 350W typical (375W Max)
Power Supply 100 - 240 Volts at 50 - 60 Hz
Operating Temperature 50 - 95° F (10 - 35° C) at 7500 ft (2286 m)
Storage Temperature -7 - 140°F (-20 - 60°C), 80% Maximum Humidity
Dimensions 18.75” x 5.83” x 17” (476mm x 148mm x 432mm)
Weight 14.1 lbs (6.4kg)
Menu Languages English, German, Spanish, French, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Swedish, Russian, Japanese, Korean, Chinese (Simplified and Traditional)
Included IN82 projector, AC Power Cord, 2M HDMI cable, M1-to-HDMI adapter, detachable cable cover, Swivel Base, Polishing Cloth, Play Big Remote Control with batteries, multi-language User’s Guide, Warranty Card
* All specifications subject to change
** Actual lamp life may vary based on the ambient environment. Conditions that may affect
lamp life include temperature, altitude, and rapidly switching the projector on and off

What do you think about 1200 to 1500 Lumens?

Also what type of speakers do you have behind the screen?

Would in-wal front and center speakers be a good way to go?

Thanks for your help.

Rich51567

Thats for the input, the Infocus IN 82 specs are

Native Resolution Full HD 1080p (1920 x 1080)
Display Technology DarkChip3 DLP® by Texas Instruments
7-segment (RGBRGBndG) color wheel
Brightness Video Optimized 1500 Max ANSI lumens (1200 typical)
SMPTE brightness up to 14.75 ft (4.5m) diagonal/1.0 gain screen
Contrast Ratio 4000:1 native (Max 12000:1 using iris)
Video Processing Digital Natural Expression™ (DNX) by Pixelworks™ 10-bit video decoder with Motion- Adaptive De-Interlacing, Rich Color Processing, Video Enhancement Processing, Noise Reduction
Color Features Up to 1.07 billion displayable colors with Deep Color™ (requires HDMI 1.3 source)
Texas Instruments BrilliantColor™
Preset color gamma tables optimized by source-type
Individually adjustable RGB colors
Advanced Features Automatic black level calibration, Digital vertical image shift, InFocus Color Gamut Calibrator utility support, ISF Day/Night modes (requires ISF Certified Calibration by professional installer)
Lamp Life and Type 2500 hrs (2000 hrs normal mode), 300W UHP
Compatibility 1080p/60/50/30/24, 1080i/60/50/35/24, 720p, 576p, 576i, 480p, 480i
NTSC, PAL, SECAM, VESA, SXGA, XGA, SVGA, VGA
Digital Keystone Correction ±13° Vertical
I/O Connections (1) HDMI (version 1.3) with HDCP
(1) Component Video, YPbPr/RGBHV, RCA
(1) Composite Video, RCA
(1) S-Video, 4-pin mini DIN
(1) Auxiliary input for 2nd video source (HDMI 1.3, DVI, VGA, or Component), M1-DA
(2) 12V screen/aspect ratio trigger, 3.5mm mini jack
(1) IR repeater input, Niles/Xantech compatible 3.5mm mini jack
(1) RS232, male DB9
Projection Lens Manual 1.2x zoom, F 2.6 - 2.8, f 39.1 - 46.9m, 136% offset
Threaded focus ring for 72mm neutral density filter (available separately)
Throw Ratio 1.85 - 2.22:1 (Distance/Width)
Aspect Ratio 16:9 (native), 4:3, 2.35:1 widescreen (requires anamorphic lens, available separately)
Projection Modes Ceiling mount (built-in ceiling-mode sensor) and tabletop, using swivel base (included)
Projection Distance 4.92’ - 32.8’ (1.5m - 9.9m)
Audible Noise 30 dB (33 dB normal mode)
Power Consumption 350W typical (375W Max)
Power Supply 100 - 240 Volts at 50 - 60 Hz
Operating Temperature 50 - 95° F (10 - 35° C) at 7500 ft (2286 m)
Storage Temperature -7 - 140°F (-20 - 60°C), 80% Maximum Humidity
Dimensions 18.75” x 5.83” x 17” (476mm x 148mm x 432mm)
Weight 14.1 lbs (6.4kg)
Menu Languages English, German, Spanish, French, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Swedish, Russian, Japanese, Korean, Chinese (Simplified and Traditional)
Included IN82 projector, AC Power Cord, 2M HDMI cable, M1-to-HDMI adapter, detachable cable cover, Swivel Base, Polishing Cloth, Play Big Remote Control with batteries, multi-language User’s Guide, Warranty Card
* All specifications subject to change
** Actual lamp life may vary based on the ambient environment. Conditions that may affect
lamp life include temperature, altitude, and rapidly switching the projector on and off

What do you think about 1200 to 1500 Lumens?

Also what type of speakers do you have behind the screen?

Would in-wal front and center speakers be a good way to go?

Thanks for your help.

The lumens and contrast for that projector seem good and bright - but all manufactuers seem to try to "one-up" the next guy with those numbers....soon projector manufacturers will claim to be brighter than 20 suns.....

I have 2 complete Citation 5.0 systems/amps/speakers. One in each of my theaters. In my dedicated theater I have the L/C/R speakers mounted/bracketed flush in the wall from behind. Pictures for ideas available. (I have access all around the outside of my dedicated theater - a box inside a box). Screen Research makes a black backing (Highly Recommended) as an add-on no matter if you flush wall mount the screen and speakers or pull it away from the wall with their ceiling mount add-on. Mine is flush with the wall.....I prefer the flush mounting of the speakers and screen.

Today the installation of my new Screenreearch screen was finished. It's ~3.5m wide and 16:9 with 4 way masking. I project on it with a JVC HD1 in a 'bat cave'. The next days will be interesting when I evaluate image quality and sound quality. The new screen is much more immersive as my old which was a Stewart microperf with 1.3 gain and 'only' 2.4m wide and 4:3.
:cool:

Today the installation of my new Screenreearch screen was finished. It's ~3.5m wide and 16:9 with 4 way masking. I project on it with a JVC HD1 in a 'bat cave'. The next days will be interesting when I evaluate image quality and sound quality. The new screen is much more immersive as my old which was a Stewart microperf with 1.3 gain and 'only' 2.4m wide and 4:3.
:cool:

I'll be waiting for your report on sound quality of your SR vs Stewart! I'm just about to have my room built and will get the biggest SR dropdown that will fit between my speakers when I have them optimally placed. :)

I'll be waiting for your report on sound quality of your SR vs Stewart! I'm just about to have my room built and will get the biggest SR dropdown that will fit between my speakers when I have them optimally placed. :)
The Stewart is gone. Judging from memory is unreliable. Measurements clearly show that Stewart filters the sound much more than Screenresearch. Since I use digital room correction to compensate for the screens anyway final differences would require direct comparison. Impossible. You can be sure though that the Screenresearch is quite neutral and leaves the sound pretty much alone. And no annoying holes dithering the images.

bump

John,

You had answered a question from me about Canadian dealers a while ago before I found this thread. That old thread seems to have disappeared since the updates to the forum, can you tell me again who I should contact about a CP2 screen in Canada? I'm just outside of Toronto. Any dealers around here where I could see one?

thanks

There are dozens of dealers there. Contact the local rep -- InTandem Canada and speak to Terry @ 416-709-1201.

Hi John,
I've hooked up with a dealer in Toronto. I have a few questions that he wasn't able to answer:
1. how much does a 100 inch wide electric screen 16:9 weigh? For some reason, the latest manual on the website doesn't give this info.

2. I see the option of a masking system on the above screen. It is a single panel that drops down when you select 2:35. Does the bottom of the screen also rise or do you then have to readjust the vertical lens shift every time you change aspect ratio? If that's the case, I don't imagine anyone would buy one because I don't know of any projectors with memory presets for vertical lens shift and it would be a pita to have to do so each time.
thanks

I just received this email tonight. It's too bad as St. John has done wonders for the brand in the US:

For four years, by hard work and smart navigation through the swift and sometimes treacherous waters of competitive marketing, StJohn Group nearly single-handedly built the Screen Research brand in North America.

Aside from having a great product to work with and one or two early industry allies, StJohn Group and its robust rep network developed the sales pitch and the value equation of acoustic transparency, and created a major industry player. We arguably forever changed the definition and raised the consciousness of what a "good" projection screen was all about.

Yearly doubling and tripling of sales proved our methods worked.

During those four years, SJG did everything needed to establish Screen Research in North America: we sought out independent testing laboratories to verify the audio and video capabilities of the product; we successfully made SR screens a household name at places like Dolby Sound, DTS, Warner Brothers, Harpo Studios, Macromedia, Entertainment Arts, Cisco Systems, and the finest AV dealers on the continent; we created major ad campaigns and garnered great reviews in the most respected magazines in North America; handled virtually all technical support; and significantly contributed to product design and development.

All this with no marketing budget from the factory, but with the firm belief in a great product and lots of heart.

We also hand-picked and trained the best reps, and targeted and selected only the best dealers for the line.


We did it all, and the brand flourished!

So it was with great excitement to learn that Screen Research would be forming its own subsidiary in the U.S., but with great shock and disappointment to learn it would be without us.

Whatever the reasons, we wish Screen Research nothing but the best. Our relationship will conclude at midnight on New Year's Eve, 2007, and we will professionally and willingly sell and service the line until then.

We agreed with Screen Research that we would collaborate on a joint industry announcement to be mutually released sometime in November. However, we have recently become aware that, since this summer, this information was already being communicated to the market and, unfortunately, we don't know how far word has spread.

Nothing is worse than being blindsided. Therefore, the only responsible thing to do is inform you immediately. Good communication has been and will continue to be one of the hallmarks of StJohn Group.

We have not received any communication from Screen Research regarding their plans, so we are unaware of the nature of a new Screen Research entity or organization going forward. All we can say at this time is that, until the end of the year, we will professionally handle any and all issues just as we do for all of our manufacturers.

What will happen to Screen Research in the North American market is anybody's guess.

2008 is shaping up to be an exciting year for StJohn Group. Our hard working reps and dealers deserve the best, and our goal and responsibility is to replace Screen Research with not just a me-too product, but something much better. Watch for our invitation to CES as well as a press release on our plans.

StJohn Group is confidently moving forward by investing our highly-respected broad experience, comprehensive knowledge, hard-earned equity and collateral into something we build ourselves.

Rest assured we will continue to build, distribute, and represent the best brands in the business.

We appreciate all of your thoughtful words of encouragement, support and your confidence in us.

This is extremely disappointing and I do hope Screen Research are reading this. I am amazed at this decision, as St John have always been top of the tree for professionalism and always display a true understanding of customer service. John Caldwell has always been a true gentleman and never hesitated to answer any of my tiring questions. I was so impressed, that I bought a 120" TheaterCurve, without seeing it.

I truly wish John and the team at St Johns all the best. Again, a very disappointing and I believe unfounded decision, by Screen Research.

Wow, what a surprise. I just bought a 100 inch SR CP2 electric screen from my local Canadian dealer...he never mentioned this.
Guess that's why they offered me a 120 inch screen for the same price (they had it in stock), but it won't work with my projector and projecting distance.

Greetings,

This post is not meant to directly offend anyone nor take food off of someones table or impune anyones hard work or dedication.....But.......

I am a self admitted wholesale whore. Retail is for suckers. I would gladly help kill the middle man. I am not the person you can pitch "We'll service it with a smile". I am willing to do the work in securing a replacement/repair if necessary for something bought from the manufacturer directly. Who needs the middle man?

These screens (I have a fixed mounted CP2) are GREAT, the BEST, I LOVE IT! But, the PRICE far exceeds the top end of most the competitions perf screens from Stewart or dalite. The last thing we need is another hand adding to the price tag. Someone's gotta go.....

What makes you think they'll sell it directly to the customer now? Probably a different distributor, who knows.

These screens (I have a fixed mounted CP2) are GREAT, the BEST, I LOVE IT! But, the PRICE far exceeds the top end of most the competitions perf screens from Stewart or dalite.



Thanks for all the nice words gentlemen. It's been an honor and a pleasure serving you. Stay tuned in the next few weeks for some big announcments regarding our new screen venture. As the letter indicated above, we intend to build something much bigger and better than we did with Screen Research.

Also --Rich, you are mistaken. Clearpix2 and ClearPix1 screens are priced BELOW Stewart's microperf pricing. The fact that you don't know this speaks volumes about your ability as a replacement for a middleman.

Good listening and viewing!

anyone using the fixed frame non AT screens from screen research. my local dealer is pushing me in this direction. thanks.

Why is he pushing you in this direction is the question. What type of set up do you have???
Why not acoustical material???

Larry

Why is he pushing you in this direction is the question. What type of set up do you have???
Why not acoustical material???

Larry

pushing may have been the wrong wording. how about suggesting. i am not putting my speakers behind the screen so there is no need for an AT screen. i will have the Black Pearl with 110" maybe 119" diagnol screen in a light controlled room.

i am just wondering if SR's fixed frame non AT screens are a solid choice. thanks.

Has anyone received a SR screen from the St. John group recently? My dealer in Canada ordered my screen 2 months ago and doesn't have an eta yet. He is trying to get some info from SJ group so hopefully I'll have an update soon. Looks like the new Canadian distributor will be the previous importer.

Hi The Bogg,

As of the first of the year SR is not using St. John as their United States Distributor. Whom it will be is a mystery at this point. Dealing with SR without one will be a negative experience.

St. John is selling a product called Screen Excellence and showing at CES as we speak, which is very similar and one product that is higher specs and all the screens are less then SR with Black Backing included etc etc.

St.John is one of the best distributors that I have ever dealt with and really cares about what products they respresent. Again being at CES and they have a very nice display there, they will be very busy and I am sure you will get what you ordered. They are a first class company. Depending on what you ordered it can take time especially to Canada as you know.

Good Luck with your purchase.

Larry

Thanks for the info Larry. I'm amazed at how similar the SE screen looks to the SR, lol. Shucks, if they'd just upped the gain a little. If the deal falls through for my SR screen then I'll just get this SE screen because it will meet my needs according to what I've read about it.

Are you a dealer for SE? I know you were a SR dealer previously.

Yep , but that is not the point of the post. If you need Sr I think AVS still sells it.

Larry

Thanks for the nice words Larry and others who have commented on StJohn Group here in the forum. We share the sames values as many of you. We are passionate about reconciling the entire experience. Audio and video. We love what we do.

Screen Research isn't going to be appointing another distributor. They have set up a US sales office. In Canada they will be using InTandem Canada as a rep and distributor. We wish them nothing but the best.

Our new venture, Screen Excellence was very well received at CES. We showed two models of motorized screens and two fixed screens. Craftsman Series and Reference Series. We also showed a active 96" wide 2.35 Reference fixed screen with our top of the line Enlightor 4k (EN4K) screen material. The Reference motorized was a 100" 16:9 model with our 1080 optimized material called Enlightor 1 (EN1). The entry level Craftsman motorized screen used the Enlightor 2 (EN2) 720 optimized material that we have been delivering to the market for the last 4 years.

An entry level DIYer system called GripStrip (tm) allows the screeen material and black backing to be retro-fitted into existing frames or home made frames. Even onto the wall. The GripStrip can be screwed, glued or riveted to anything. No more sore thumbs. No more extra pi-grip. GripStrip uses a pizza cutter like tool to insert the materials into the gripper. No tensioning of the material is necessary.

All Screen Excellence screens include:
Black backing included
Guaranteed for no moire in their recommended resolutions and screen sizes.
All are matte white, unity gain (0.95).
All require no re-eqing, no high frequency roll-off, or audio comb filtering.
All carry a lifetime warranty and pre-paid freight.


Pricing is extremely competitive. Contact me offline for more details.

I want to take this opportunity to say “hello” to the many Screen Research fans here on the AVS forum, and toss in my proverbial 2-cents to help set the record straight as to our corporate transition activities. There’s two sides to every story, and ours is no exception.

As many of you know, Screen Research continues to be one of the world’s “premiere” high end custom home theater screen manufacturers. Our flagship ISF™ and THX™ certified ClearPix2™ acoustically transparent screen surface continue to meet and exceed the highest expectations of the most discriminating home cinema enthusiasts. Our unity gain, ISF™ certified SolidPix™ fabric is coming into its own, receiving new accolades and endorsements whenever a solid, non-AT screen is required. Thanks to you and our many fans, our company has grown by leaps and bounds in just five short years, and we’re now active in over 30 countries around the globe. Our product line up and custom offerings continue to expand, with new and innovative solutions such as LeWing™ with JBL® front LCR speaker ensembles coming on line – remarkable products that truly bring cinema magic to homes everywhere… including many of yours!

Rapid growth such as ours can cause challenges all its own. Some of you expressed disappointment when St. John Group was released from their Screen Research distribution agreement at the end of 2007. Your angst was heard and we’ve collectively made every effort to help mitigate this transition. SJG indeed did a good job in launching the SR brand locally and helping us grow during the company’s early, formulative years. In many business adventures, however, there often comes a time when a third party, intermediary organization such as SJG reaches certain limits and may actually be an impediment to further growth. This situation became one of those cases.

It became clear that, in order to truly strengthen our North American presence and provide even better service to our valued dealers and customers, we would ultimately need our own factory operation. I’m proud to say that we accomplished exactly that in just a few short months, and that our Screen Research subsidiary operation located in beautiful Livermore, CA (~30 minutes east of the greater San Francisco Bay area) opened its doors on January 2, 2008, on time and on budget. We truly never missed a beat and are now highly successful across the entire North American continent, with our own qualified local sales/support representatives in place, in every state and territory throughout the greater US, Canada and Mexico.

So to make it abundantly clear, Screen Research is indeed live and well, and we’d welcome you to stop in whenever you find yourself in the SF Bay Area. We boast a team of dedicated home theater professionals, are now providing expanded local product warehousing for rapid access to popular screens and sizes, we’re providing first class tech support here in the States, we boast a fully-equipped training facility (… recently hosted Joel Silver and his ISF training classes, a Sencore training event and more), and with much more to come.

Thanks for everyone’s support over the years, and let us know if we can ever be of help crafting your cinema dreams.

Best,

Jim McGall
VP Sales
Screen Research North America

USA mobile 415.515.8641 (Pacific Time)
email: jim.mcgall@screenresearch.com

North American Headquarters:
2021 Las Positas Court, Suite #147, Livermore, CA 94551
Phone (925) 454-9900 • Fax (925) 454-9904

Corporate Headquarters:
Parc d'Activité de Ragon - 16, rue Louis Pasteur - 44119 Treillières - France
Phone +33 (0) 2 40 77 87 89 • Fax +33 (0) 2 40 77 86 78

Yep , but that is not the point of the post. If you need Sr I think AVS still sells it.

Larry

You are correct. :)

Not much activity in this thread for a very long time!

I had the opportunity to see a Screen Research screen recently (with the CP2 material) on a curved 2.35 screen with variable masking, and I thought it was extremely pleasing to watch.

I'm considering a motorized SR screen for my forthcoming theater, although I don't really think I need an AT screen because my speakers will not be behind it (although a comment early in this thread about acoustic treatments on the front wall being affected by the screen now has me wondering...).

Does the lack of activity on this thread for so long indicate that folks are happier with other manufacturers' products, or...?

Does the lack of activity on this thread for so long indicate that folks are happier with other manufacturers' products, or...?

Good question. Personally, as an owner of CP2 after StewartTek 1.3 I couldn't be happier. The CP2 delivers on all the claims of the manufacturer and has none of the drawbacks of the other screen technologies.

The one thing to be aware of is the negative gain. It will mean finding brighter projectors to light the screen. Depending on screen size this could end up ruling out some of the projectors that people rave about on this site.

Mark

Well, I was looking at the unity gain material, so hopefully that'd be tolerable in a totally light-controlled room on a 96" wide 2.35 screen with either an RS20 or a VPL-VW60. I do still need to crunch those numbers, though.

Thanks for your feedback. I'm happy to hear that you're happy with your screen!

I was wondering about mounting of a SR 2.35 2-way C-mask screen to the wall. The manual states that there are 2 L brackets and as well as 4 corner mounts. As I am having panels throughout the room, with stretch fabric, I need to know if I need blocking to support the frame and where do I put the blocking.

Does anyone have pictures of their mounting? What distances do I need? What kind of support do I need?

fyi, the stretch fabric is 1" thick throughout the room.

Sadly, Screen Research has entered bankruptcy as of October 15, 2009.
http://www.cepro.com/article/report_screen_research_enters_receivership/

Hopefully, they will find their way through as I really love my CP2.

I think it may not be a good move to purchase from a bankrupt company. I was looking at CP2 material, but now maybe it will be SE EN4k.

I think it may not be a good move to purchase from a bankrupt company. I was looking at CP2 material, but now maybe it will be SE EN4k.


It's been 9 months now and Screen Research is still pressing and providing top notch screens. We've done half a dozen theaters with SR since October, including two screens which were recently re-designed and released this Spring at ISE ( their new X mask series). They were recently featured in Home Toys and Wide Screen Review. Not sure which dates but I believe the Home Toys was for June? Looks like their French receivership (bankruptcy?) was a good financial move to restructure and weather the financial storm that has effected so much of the rest of the world. We'll continue to use SR as they have not only the best product, but great service and support. I'm always well taken care of.

I was looking at SR's site and comparing screen materials. I guess they now have a ClearPix 3 that seems to have slightly higher and more uniform gain, but at the cost of some of the acoustic transparency. Has anybody had a chance to compare with a CP 2? I have extensively auditioned the CP 2 and found it excellent. I'm wondering whether the CP 3 is considered an improvement or just an alternative.

Any word on whether ClearPix2 will support 4K resolution?

Any word on whether ClearPix2 will support 4K resolution?

Wow! Great question! Crap, I wish I had thought of that yesterday while talking to one of their senior folks...