I have an update on Canadian pricing:

This turned out to be fairly quick as our Canadian distributor - InTandem Canada - was in the mist of repricing their entire line to account for the recent strength of the Canadian dollar verses the US dollar. They went ahead jumped us up the todo list and calculated a new price for the RadianceXD.

The new RadianceXD price is $4795 Canadian. This is about $4570 USD at today's Canadian $ / US $ exchange rate of 1.05 (today's rate per exchangerate.com).

I would again like to talk about why the Canadian price needs to be higher than the US, and add a couple of things I didn't think about.

- Shipping to Canada by express shipping (which we use) is not cheap.
- The unit then needs to be re-shipped to the dealers. Because of customs fees, it would not make sense to ship individual units from Lumagen to Canadian dealers.
- Customs has processing fees even without an import duties. You would need to pay these if you bought from outside Canada.
- The distributor needs to have an allowance for warranty repair, since they need to ship back to Lumagen in the US for any repair work.
- When they pay us, their bank charges a premium and so they pay more than the stated exchange rate.
- They need to have some allowance for exchange-rate fluxuations to avoid having to change pricing on a daily basis.

Please note: If you buy from a USA dealer and they ship out of the USA (which they are not supposed to do), then if you need warranty service, you need to ship the unit back to them in the USA. We only support our products where they were sold, for what I think are obvious reasons.

So, if you are in Canada, please try our Canadian dealers, and make your best deal with them. I think you will find it cost effective, easier, and less risk (for warranty shipping costs), way to buy your RadianceXD.

I have an update on Canadian pricing:

The new RadianceXD price is $4795 Canadian. This is about $4570 USD at today's Canadian $ / US $ exchange rate of 1.05 (today's rate per exchangerate.com).


Hi Jim,

To clarify, it would appear you have inadvertantly converted in the wrong direction, the Canadian dollar is presently worth more than USD therefore $4795 CAD = $5031.5 USD, at least when using this currency converter. I think it's important to note the customs processing fee is $5.

http://www.xe.com/ucc/

The list of justifications makes it quite clear that Lumagen and the distributor should find great value with this method of distribution and increased pricing, I completely understand how this method of distribution is attractive to Lumagen, I however fail to find any added value to the customer. There would far greater value to purchase directly from a US channel, most of whom would actually offer a discounted price considerably lower than list and who don't treat shipping as a profit center. The Canadian distributor made it quite clear he was not prepared to move on his inflated price and now he appears to throw up a few red herrings to justify his practises. If there is value in me prepaying $700 or more to the distributor for my potential warranty shipping costs more this really doesn't speak much for the product. You'd be hearing from my lawyer long before $700 worth of shipping costs were exhausted whether paid by me through the distributor or not. Furthermore, if the poor distributor can not manage to develop a system of pricing which reacts to and reasonably reflects exchange rate fluctuations faster the every 10 years or so then I'm not paying for their greed masked as stupidity any longer if avoidable.

By the way this is not a rant against you or Lumagen, just felt like venting about the generally very high electronics prices Canadians have been forced to pay and obviouly it's a bit of a thorn in my side and this as good a soap box as any. I feel much better now, thanks all for listening.

Good morning,

just to feed this discussion from the other side of the ocean.
In Continental Europe it is exactly the same situation: the Radiance is quoted at more than 4000 Euros and the HDQ is quoted at 2000€. Tring to talk with the distributor was at that time impossible... so the direct import from US.
I fully agree that very few people works for free, but at the same time, in the today world where everybody has access to the information, there are less and less people who will accept such prices.

By the way my Radiance is up and running since two days after the trip from US.

Best regards, Lenny
1 euro= 1,43 USD

Update:
- there's an official price for the HD-SDI to HDMI box, lower than what was previously announced!
- new topic; buying the XD frmo outside the US. A little controversial right now.

Looks likeI did have an inversion error as the Canadian dollars is worth more than the US dollar.

The Canadian dollar has gone up in value verses the US dollar by 20% since January. I think that is the adjustment being made.

We ship by express since our products arrive in good shape.

We don't ship direct to Canadian dealers. We ship in bulk to the distributor, and they ship units to dealers. How is this unusual.

Allocating for Warranty service is in no way an inappropriate practice. It is their responsibility under our agreement to ship defective units back to us and we then repair them and ship back, so they need to account for this. It would be dumb not to.

Any bank will charge the exchange fee. It is not huge, but it exists and does increase the price of the product.

You bought in the US. That is not what we are talking about here. If you had been in Canada and bought from a US dealer you would not have coverage except through that dealer. In the US we do handle warranty service directly.

I have tried to address some of the reasoning behind the pricing in Canada. We need to have a distributor in Canada and they need to make a profit. Hopefully we can now get on to something a bit more interesting.

That said - I'm sure you're right and a little more familiarity will help overcome that feeling. But if you're open to ideas when you cross that bridge (wizards or whatever) I'd be happy to provide some input! :)

We are always happy to listen, and open to use good ideas from our customers. I think it helps us provide the best possible product.

When we get closer, I think it would be appropriate to open a thread, or add to the on-going Radiance thread, with suggestions on menu improvement and "wizard" tools for the Radiance family.

It will be a while yet though.

@Jim, I don't want to drive you away from the forum by going on your nerves. But please try to see it from the view point of a customer: E.g. here in Germany I have to pay 5720 USD to get a Radiance. And no chance for a discount, as far as I'm aware. In the USA not only is the *MSRP* 3999 USD, but there are probably (haven't checked) good dealers were you can get a nice deal on top of the good MSRP. That sums up to one hell of a dramatic price difference. It's not only that we non-USA consumers feel cheated, it's also a direct loss for you: Because the difference between 3500 USD (or whatever the best price in USA is) and 5720 USD can often be the factor which lets a consumer decide that he can live without the Radiance...

I'm aware that this is a tough topic for you, since you need to serve two very different kind of customers: (1) The freak which does everything himself and wants to save as much money as possible. And (2) the custom installer who needs good and reliable service and doesn't mind paying a little bit extra. I see that this is a problematic situation for you. But I hope that we were able to raise awareness a bit about how we end user freaks feel. The world has gotten a lot smaller in the recent years. Having so strict country borders is kind of getting old...

I feel compelled to chime in here...the issue with Canadain pricing verus US pricing is not limited or specific to Limagen and applies (i) to most, if not all, consumer electronic companies and (ii) to most other market segments (i.e. cars, clothing, etc.).

The issue/pricing difference is not one that Lumagen or any other manufacturer cal solve because it is created by the distributor (a.k.a. middleman)...meaning that the only way to solve the problem is to remove the middleman which is -- unless Lumagen can establish a business case which is doubtful -- not going to happne...the finger, in this thread, is being pointed at the wrong entity/person...it should be pointed at the mddleman/distributor over which Lumagen has no control because it is how/why the middlemen do business....sit back and think for a moment, this is why the Canadian finance minister met with manufacturers with direct/owned distrubution channels in Canada and not those who have.use middlemen...if you want to be mad you will need to take on the entire "distributor/middlemen" network and, to that, good luck!

I was also going to chime in, but others have mostly done it for me :). All I want to add is that a buyer/customer from any country should be allowed to by any product direct from any other country and not be forced to buy it from a locally appointed distributor. In doing so, he/she accepts all that comes with it - warranty issues/cost, support etc etc. Just give the buyer the choice - that's all I suggest - and drop the old gray import argument/restrictions.

Guys, time to go back to the original topic of this thread and have fun! Let's make the Radiance the best VP ever.
Joelc how are you since the old Tag McLaren forum time?
Regards, Lenny

All right, back on track. :)

I just ordered a USB to RS232 adapter, so I can update from my laptop.

It is a model similar to this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812203018 except the cable is 3 foot long. (The actual model just disappeared from Newegg, I must have boght the last one!) Has anyone else been using something similar? I think I remember earlier in the thread someone mentioning they got it working but it wasn't trouble free...

I realized that using my desktop for updating would be too cumbersome. Also, eventually I hope to add an MSC-400 unit to the mix for RS232 control. That will make updating even more of a pain, but eventually by then the updates will be less frequent.

I am using the RS-232 command set with no problems...only issue is the need to change connections for upgrade vs operation...

I am using the RS-232 command set with no problems...only issue is the need to change connections for upgrade vs operation...

Ditto RS-232.. easy commands to program...

Ditto RS-232.. easy commands to program...


But do you guys use a USB adapter, or is it directly from a RS232 port?

This discussion as old as I can remember. First of all the german price of 4290,00 EURO for the Radiance was posted a year ago and sure the USD has significantly lost in value since then and a price reduction for imported US products would be possible.
Still the RADIANCE is not officially released so probably if the USD stays that low compared to EURO I might go down to 3.990,00.
I am not a big fan of changing pricing too often, especially going cheaper as this would upset the customers that just bought more expenisve.

Still it would never be as cheap as buying from a US dealer that gives a big discount.
The way products are sold are completely different in each market. The US systems is almost unique with the manufacturer selling directly to the dealer.
In other markets there has to be a distributor who is stocking, repairing and marketing the prodcut.
In US the dealers are ordering one by one and if they have a defective unit it goes directly back to the manufacturer.
I think we (SPATZ) have the biggest stock of Lumagen products outside US and my dealer customers love that they can order whatever they want and have it next day because their client once decided cannot wait any minute longer to receive his precious new toy.
If a customer reports a broken unit, he is getting either an exchange or a repair that does not take longer than a day, as we either repair on part level and if this is not possible we swap boards.
I wonder how long your unit will be gone when you buy it from a US box mover. Probably 2-3 months. And you pay shipping and again 19% VAT if the US dealer ships it back to you. You probably can avoid the paying of the 19% VAT but believe me this is no fun - the papers you need for this are crazy.
Especially the LUMAGEN scaler product needs extensive support because of the nature of the product so this has to be covered as well. For those who do not need any support because they are AVS geeks I am sure any of my dealers will consider this and apply a discount. So let us do some math. RADIANCEXD suggested retail is 4290,00 EUROs that inlcudes 19% VAT = 3605,04 net * 1,4 = 5047 USD.
This net EURO price included 150 EURO shipping with insurance and 4,5 % customs so we are looking at 3300 EURO = 4620 USD.
So this would be the right price to compare to the 3.990 USD.
You can ask yourself if the 630 USD premium (unnegotiated) is it worth that you can call somebody who actually understands the technology and that is waiting with his stock to replace your defective product whenever it has a problem.
So if you go to a dealer of mine and he understands that you never need any support from him he might grant you 5-10 % on the 4290 ERUOs so in the best case you are looking at 3861,00 -19% VAT = 3127,41.
So now take off the 300 for shipping and custom and you are looking at 2800 EURO * 1,4 = 3920 USD.
Now decide yourself if the self import is worth the risk or if you rather enjoy the safety of the distributor cushion.

Only for the record:

We did quite a few warranty repairs free of charge from people who were blowing their input chips because of too high DC voltages cause of earth loops and sometimes even Lumagen units need hardware modifications that are easy to do when you bought from us - one day promised !

And MADSHI if you really want a RADIANCE I have stock , send me a mail
and be one of the first to have one.

And MADSHI if you really want a RADIANCE I have stock , send me a mail and be one of the first to have one.
:) Thanks, but I haven't decided yet...

I bought my serial to USB cable from Radio Shack. I use the supplied serial cable from Lumagen hooked into the Radio Shack cable. It works flawlessly and enables the frequent updates from my laptop.

Just wanted to represent the little HT guys out there who can't afford the $4K for the XD and put my request in for the "Radiance XS". Those of us who don't need all of the inputs or the double output capability of the XD are waiting patiently for the working class version of the Radiance. Personally, I am hoping for 4 HDMI/DVI inputs, 2 component/RGBHV, 2 composite, 2 s-video, and one HDMI/DVI output; with the appropriate audio inputs and outputs too. I'd love to hear a confirmation on something similar to this from somebody.

Did you read those specs off the DVDO product list :)? The VP30/50/50Pro would fullfill your requirements wrt your I/O needs. I should have a spare VP50 soon ;).

Just wanted to represent the little HT guys out there who can't afford the $4K for the XD and put my request in for the "Radiance XS". Those of us who don't need all of the inputs or the double output capability of the XD are waiting patiently for the working class version of the Radiance. Personally, I am hoping for 4 HDMI/DVI inputs, 2 component/RGBHV, 2 composite, 2 s-video, and one HDMI/DVI output; with the appropriate audio inputs and outputs too. I'd love to hear a confirmation on something similar to this from somebody.

The RadianceXS is un-announced, has no schedule, or pricing set yet. Still I have talked about it, so it is a well known secret. I'm more comfortable talking about these possibilities now that the RadianceXD audio is getting to be in pretty good shape and we're back to adding video features.

Plans for the RadianceXS include the following:
4 HDMI in
2 component in
2 composite in
2 SVideo in
1 HDMI out
1 SPDIF out

There will be no PiP/PoP support.

Picture quality will be the same as RadianceXD.

I am going back and forth on whether to include analog/SPDIF audio inputs. I think this product might be better served having the amp switch these, but having the planned SPDIF output for those who need to send audio to their amp from HDMI sources when the amp does not have HDMI inputs. I, as always, will be listening to your comments, but audio to me runs a distant second in a video processor and should be delt with in the amp as much as possible. Given the short video delay in the Radiance, audio lip-sync delay is not proving to be an issue. Since audio is available in the RadianceXD, I prefer to only have the SPDIF output for the RadianceXS (other than HDMI audio in and out of course). I may not include an audio delay function either.

Also, I'm debating between a 1U (1.75") and a 2U (3.5") case height for this product. I am getting more 1U votes than I expected even though it means we can't use the RadianceXD front panel. If you have a preference on height please feel free to post.

Update: some details have emerged about the XD's little brother the XS.

Maybe I should start the "Unofficial RadianceXS FAQ" thread. :)

I am going back and forth on whether to include analog/SPDIF audio inputs. I think this product might be better served having the amp switch these, but having the planned SPDIF output for those who need to send audio to their amp from HDMI sources when the amp does not have HDMI inputs.SPDIF outputs still exist even on high end HD DVD/BD players. Including SPDIF inputs/output would only be a matter of convenience, allowing you to run fewer cables. But if I was in the market for a cheap processor, I'd say make it as cheap as possible without sacrificing image quality; dropping the audio would meet both goals. You can still run the spdif directly to the receiver. And these days, which receiver doesn't have umpteen optical/coaxial inputs... ?

Now of course I'm all set with the XD so the folks actually considering the XS might have a different opinion. :)

I am going back and forth on whether to include analog/SPDIF audio inputs. I think this product might be better served having the amp switch these, but having the planned SPDIF output for those who need to send audio to their amp from HDMI sources when the amp does not have HDMI inputs.
Well, I for one prefer to have my audio routed through the VP. It makes for simpler source switching - only one remote to operate/program. I plan to run the XD audio to my Onkyo 605 with just the second HDMI output - pity you can't buy an amp/receiver that is just that, an amp with just a couple of audio inputs.

The Onkyo Setup menu output comes back into the VP and then to the display. That way the display sees just one constant input resolution, rather than having to switch between 480/576i and 1080p which is what would happen if I routed the HDMI VP's output through the Onkyo to the display. I don't need a myriad of other audio inputs - I have them all routed through my VP. I still think that a dedicated VP is a better and far more flexible solution than say even the Onkyo 905 with HQV.

So Jim, my vote would be to include SPDIF inputs on the XS. And oh, 1U height would be much better.

Here's my vote for the RadianceXS:

(1) I'd much prefer 1U, but only if you can do it without adding a fan. I also prefer silver over black, btw.

(2) Personally, I don't need *ANY* analog inputs or outputs. I think the importance of analog connections is on a steady decline. So IMHO you could drop all of those, if it allows you to lower the price a bit. Well, but that's just me. Maybe other people have other needs. Maybe you could do a poll about this to find out if there's still lots of need for analog connections?

(3) Some source devices have problems with properly serving HDMI audio, e.g. some sat receivers here in Germany. So having maybe 2 SPDIF inputs (I prefer optical) might still make sense. I do like routing the audio through the video processor because it makes switching easier. But if adding SPDIF inputs adds noticable costs, I could probably live without it. However, I think SPDIF inputs would be much more helpful than any analog audio/video inputs...

Given the short video delay in the Radiance, audio lip-sync delay is not proving to be an issue. I may not include an audio delay function either.

Also, I'm debating between a 1U (1.75") and a 2U (3.5") case height for this product.

I never had a lipsync problem with the VisionHD and currently use a Gennum vxp based processor with lipsync delay built in but I don't use the delay.

I'd vote for the 1U size as long as the unit is heavy enough not to slide around too much.

I had an HDQ and I much prefer 2U and Black because I have plenty of space, it looks more substantial, and affords plenty of room for connectors.

- Rich

Well, I for one prefer to have my audio routed through the VP. It makes for simpler source switching - only one remote to operate/program.I strongly agree with this. I want an all-in-one-hub to which I can send all sources (video and audio) and get out a single HDMI signal to be sent to a display (possibly routed through an A/V receiver). Some digital sources still require separate digital audio (either because they're DVI or because HDMI audio is faulty in the source).

And I would be fine with digital-only (no analog), as I mentioned previously.

Though I own the RadianceXD, I'll be needing a VP for another display, and something like the RadianceXS might be perfect for that.

I just started setting up my RadianceXD beta unit last evening. I haven't fully digested the manual or looked around yet to see how the audio is supposed to be configured so pardon my ignorance...

If I have some sources that use HDMI and some that are digital coax or optical, can I route all of the audio out a single HDMI cable to my AVR, or do I also have to utilize a coax out of the Radiance, and still do some switching on my AVR?

I made a quick attempt at this last night, failed, and just hooked my coax and optical sources straight to the AVR. I'd much rather avoid the extra switching and utilize the lip sync delay in the Radiance.

thanks,
aaron

>>>I made a quick attempt at this last night, failed, and just hooked my coax and optical sources straight to the AVR. I'd much rather avoid the extra switching and utilize the lip sync delay in the Radiance.

Connect your coax & optical cables to the XD. Then, for each source that is not HDMI audio, select the source and then bring up the XD menu. One of the options for the input is Audio. Select that and then pick the source (Coax # or Optical #). Remember to select Save after making the change.

I route my audio out via coax to my preprocessor (no HDMI inputs), but the HDMI outputs should be carrying the audio after you configure this way.

I just started setting up my RadianceXD beta unit last evening. I haven't fully digested the manual or looked around yet to see how the audio is supposed to be configured so pardon my ignorance...

If I have some sources that use HDMI and some that are digital coax or optical, can I route all of the audio out a single HDMI cable to my AVR, or do I also have to utilize a coax out of the Radiance, and still do some switching on my AVR?

I made a quick attempt at this last night, failed, and just hooked my coax and optical sources straight to the AVR. I'd much rather avoid the extra switching and utilize the lip sync delay in the Radiance.

thanks,
aaron

Aaron: First I would make sure you have the latest firmware (10/22/07). I am no expert at all....first time Lumagen user....but, if you go into each video input, you can choose the audio function (HDMI # input, Coax # input or Tos. # input) and assign the appropriate type of audio connection and corresponding number from the cable input on the back.

One thing that will help a lot for those of us new to the companies products is an update with the manual (which should be coming soo).

Have you signed up and visited the Lumagen's beta forum? If not, contact them to get set up....it has a wealth of info.

Ron

Aaron: First I would make sure you have the latest firmware (10/22/07). I am no expert at all....first time Lumagen user....but, if you go into each video input, you can choose the audio function (HDMI # input, Coax # input or Tos. # input) and assign the appropriate type of audio connection and corresponding number from the cable input on the back.

One thing that will help a lot for those of us new to the companies products is an update with the manual (which should be coming soo).

Have you signed up and visited the Lumagen's beta forum? If not, contact them to get set up....it has a wealth of info.

Ron

Ron beat me to it :)

Also make sure you have the latest firmware update, as a few audio bugs have been fixed recently (like not picking up the sound from coax inputs on power-on).

Edit: D'oh! Ron said that too :)

Thanks guys. I have scanned the beta support forum, but haven't buried myself into it yet. I also updated to the latest firmware before I tried setting anything up. I just wanted to make sure that what I am trying to do *should* work before I start diagnosing and researching. I only spent a couple of minutes trying to figure it out before I punted.

From everything you guys said, it should work, and I am also pretty sure that I configured my input to use the right coax, but didn't get anything out on the HDMI side. I'll set it up again this weekend and troubleshoot from there... and likely post my issues on the beta forum if I can't figure them out.

thanks again,
aaron

Lip-Sync delay is interesting. My new processor seems to have audio delay that exceeds the Lumagen Radiance. The radiance is faster. Who would have thought that.

Even though this is a not a Radiance problem, will there be an update to provide a fixed video delay?

- Rich

Lip-Sync delay is interesting. My new processor seems to have audio delay that exceeds the Lumagen Radiance. The radiance is faster. Who would have thought that.

Even though this is a not a Radiance problem, will there be an update to provide a fixed video delay?

- Rich

This is addressed in the FAQ (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=909924).

On the RadianceXS:

Sounds like ... based on a very small sample size ... that we should go for:

- Input/output per my last post but add SPDIF inputs.

- 1U is the slight preference for height.

- Okay to drop analog-audio inputs. This does save a few dollars, but more importantly perhaps it saves space on the back panel to allow for more SPDIF inputs on a 1U case.

So the RadianceXS feature set to now discuss is:

4 HDMI in
2 component in
2 composite in
2 SVideo in
2 TOS-link SPDIF inputs
6 COAX SPDIF inputs
1 HDMI out
2 COAX SPDIF out

No PiP/PoP support.
Picture quality will be the same as RadianceXD.
1U rack height (would use VisionHDQ front panel design)

Looks good to me. If you ask me, probably 2x optical and 2x coax SPDIF would be plenty. But from your list of SPDIF inputs it seems you're thinking about reusing the XD SPDIF inputs? If that's good for economics of scale, then I won't complain... :)

Question around: Who still needs composite and S-Video inputs?

We need composite for sync on SCART input.....I also think that more optical ins would be useful rather than all the spdifs....but I suppose you can always buy an aftermarket toslink to spdif convertor.

Randiance XD Planning - Help Needed!

I don't have my XD yet (pre-buy list), but I am trying to work out some connection issues in anticipation of receiving the unit. One of the things I want to do is watch sports while listening to my iPod. With my Onkyo 805, I can switch to the "dock" input (L,R, & Video ins) and view my iPod menu on screen so that I can remotely choose songs to play. Of course this means that I cannot view or listen to other sources at the same time. If I switch back to another source ( cable, dvd), I loose "dock" audio and video in favor of the new source. My plan is to connect all input sources to the XD, except the iPod dock (leave it on the 805), then use the second HDMI out on the XD to connect audio to the 805. This way, I would have HDMI 1 out from the XD to HDMI 1 on my RS-1, and HDMI 2 out(audio only) on the XD to the 805 for audio processing. The 805's HDMI out would then go the the RS-1's HDMI 2 input so that I could switch to the iPod dock to set and listen to my music and view the menu on the RS-1 HDMI 2 port, then switch back to RS-1 input 1 to view the ball game (no sound required.) However I am concerned about this approach after reading some posts about routing the ONKYO HDMI output back into the XD for switching purposes. Does this appear to present unneccessary switching problems? I would appreciate any ideas on this

Thx,
Stan

We need composite for sync on SCART input.....
Fair point.

I also think that more optical ins would be useful rather than all the spdifs....but I suppose you can always buy an aftermarket toslink to spdif convertor.
I also prefer optical over coax. But even the XD doesn't have more than 2 optical. Wouldn't it be strange if the XS had more optical ins compared to the XD? :)

I don't prefer optical over spdif...it's just that in UK most domestic digital receivers don't have spdif output...and neither do many legacy games consoles.

I don't prefer optical over spdif...it's just that in UK most domestic digital receivers don't have spdif output...and neither do many legacy games consoles.
Not to nitpick, but both optical and coaxial are S/PDIF.

I don't prefer optical over spdif...
I do, because it avoids ground loops.

it's just that in UK most domestic digital receivers don't have spdif output...and neither do many legacy games consoles.
Same here in Germany.

IMHO, in order to make VPs more of a mainstream product the prices of these units need to go down (way down). If we all had a wish list it would probably look and feel (act) like the XD at a much lower price, but we all know that is out of the question for now. Therefore, i think that the XS should be a stripped down XD perhaps with perhaps without an S/PDIF output for HDMI sources (depending on cost). Video processing is what is most important here. Most new and some old A/V receivers handle audio switching and even audio delay. And most newer remote controls can handle switching devices and sources on and off. Most of the people that come to my house ask about my VP when they see it, and are interested once I tell them what it can do, but when they learn about the price they all rather stick with what they have and let their TV do the processing.

Laggs..CATCH22.

Mainstream use would be using the scaler in a system where there is no surround sound system. In that case you NEED audio switching, of every type, as all audio sources need to go to ONE video input on the TV...and that of course puts the price up.

I do agree thought that if we had a wish list everyone would want everything for nothing.:)

On the RadianceXS:

Sounds like ... based on a very small sample size ... that we should go for:

- Input/output per my last post but add SPDIF inputs.

- 1U is the slight preference for height.

- Okay to drop analog-audio inputs. This does save a few dollars, but more importantly perhaps it saves space on the back panel to allow for more SPDIF inputs on a 1U case.

So the RadianceXS feature set to now discuss is:

4 HDMI in
2 component in
2 composite in
2 SVideo in
2 TOS-link SPDIF inputs
6 COAX SPDIF inputs
1 HDMI out
2 COAX SPDIF out

No PiP/PoP support.
Picture quality will be the same as RadianceXD.
1U rack height (would use VisionHDQ front panel design)
Well, I'd like to modify this list slightly. If I want to humour my insistance on passing all my sources through my VP and I want to route pure legacy audio devices through it as well, then I would substitute 2 of the 6 Coax SPDIF inputs for 2 channel audio. S-Video and Video sources would most likely require analog audio inputs anyway.

If room permits on a 1U chassis, then I would duplicate Coax inputs with Optical as well. Not only is this better in eliminating ground loops - it avoids blowing up inputs when the attached equipment is not grounded and carries a significant amount of leakage/static voltage. And for the same reason, I would also make one of the Digital output an optical one.

I would not reduce the Video inputs as these maybe needed for Sync on SCART - RGBs input sources - as somone has already pointed out.

And lastly and very importantly to me - have it available in Black please - I like all my equipment to be unobtrusive and disappear into the background.

To Summerise in table form, the RadianceXS feature set of my choice would be:

4 HDMI in
2 component in
2 composite in
2 SVideo in
4 TOS-link SPDIF inputs
2 COAX SPDIF inputs
1 HDMI out
1 COAX SPDIF out
1 TOS-link SPDIF out
1 HD/SD SDI input

That's already 2 more TOS-Link inputs than the DVDO VP series has:) . Now, for the coup de gras I've added 1 SD/HD SDI input as well. If built onto the motherboard, it would add little cost - less than 20 bucks is my guess - to the unit. I'd be willing to sacrifice 2 of the TOS-Link inputs for it.

Well, I'd like to modify this list slightly. If I want to humour my insistance on passing all my sources through my VP and I want to route pure legacy audio devices through it as well, then I would substitute 2 of the 6 Coax SPDIF inputs for 2 channel audio. S-Video and Video sources would most likely require analog audio inputs anyway.

The issue here is (probably, Jim might be able to elaborate if needed) that the 6 coax spdif is a daughterboard that's already avaliable. If they needed another, smaller SPDIF daughterboard, plus another smaller analog audio input board, this would probably increase price quite a bit. The same goes for SDI input, making changes of that magnitude is not an option - if it was that easy/cheap, it would have been on the XD.

I'm 100% with Jim on this one, I believe his proposed feature set looks just right. At some point, people will have to realize that if they want everything, they'll need to buy the big bro'...

I'd like to say that I'm amazed (positively) that Jim discusses this openly on the forums, before the XD is even on the market. Knowing forum users, a lot of people will hold off buying an XD because they know XS is coming at some point. To some extent, Jim is directly hurting sales to keep consumers happy. I can't stress enough that this is the kind of manufacturer that consumers should support (but I guess anyone reading this thread already knows this....;-) ) I guess one could argue that these discussions also hold people off from buying the competitors' products as well, but still...

Maybe it would make sense to add a 3rd SKU with just 4 HDMI inputs and 1 HDMI output and no other connections at all? Not sure if that makes any sense. Just a thought...

......The issue here is (probably, Jim might be able to elaborate if needed) that the 6 coax spdif is a daughterboard that's already avaliable. If they needed another, smaller SPDIF daughterboard, plus another smaller analog audio input board, this would probably increase price quite a bit. The same goes for SDI input, making changes of that magnitude is not an option - if it was that easy/cheap, it would have been on the XD.
I fear you might be right on all counts here. That begs the question though - if existing hardware is to be used predominantly, then there will be little opportunity to make some real costs savings. The difference will really be residing in the firmware which will determine how much you can get out of the almost identical hardware.

Mother/daughter board cominations are always more expensive than a single main PCB. But, having said that, there is a merrit in keeping I/O separate from the main board - witness Pixel Magic and their Crystalio II series - everything is on one board AFAIK and that has given them some grief as their HDMI 1.1 I/O cannot pass multichannel PCM - there is apparently nothing they can do to fix that apart from a hardware mod. Likewise their is no upgrade option to have the SD SDI port upgraded to HD. We live in interesting times....

I fear you might be right on all counts here. That begs the question though - if existing hardware is to be used predominantly, then there will be little opportunity to make some real costs savings. The difference will really be residing in the firmware which will determine how much you can get out of the almost identical hardware.

I'm not sure I agree with you on this part. As one mentioned, I believe economics of scale are as important as actual number of components used. Making the hardware different just for the sake of it, won't actually cut costs. You'd still save on smaller analog video input board, smaller (or just less?) HDMI input board(s), smaller HDMI outbut board, no analog audio input board, cheaper casing (presumably). On top of this, one could perhaps argue that development costs are covered by the Radiance XD, thus allowing for slightly smaller markup on the XS model.

Keep in mind, these are just guesses. Even though I am a Lumagen dealer (should have stated that in my first post, sorry), I have no insight into production costs of these babies.

In any case, I'm sure you'll agree that a unit with Radiance performance at, say, 3200$, is a lot more interesting than a 2000$ unit with lesser performance.

I will, however, put up a vote for a 1 HDMI in > 1 HDMI out CMS/color decoding/grayscale box, without scaling or other kinds of processing...

Yes, I do always worry that talking more about the RadianceXS could keep someone from buying the RadianceXD. That is why I have held off as long as I have. It's a calculated risk. I need to start working on the RadianceXS, and I want it to be driven by what customers want. I consider the RadianceXD the custom install piece. I think the RadianceXS is kind of a combination of “mid-market custom install” and “enthusiast” (a.k.a. AVS Forum members). So it makes sense to me to take the risk of actually building what the customers are needing, which requires I am open about the process of defining the feature set.

As to pricing on video processors: Yes I would love to have them sell for lower prices. If they were a mainstream market item, selling with every home theater system, we could reduce the price somewhat. However, there is a lot of work to serve a small fraction of the market, so they do need to cost more. Also, we design for “best of class” and things like having an HDMI receiver with every input, true PiP for 6 HDMI inputs, a large FPGA for all our special features (no-ring scaling, etc), and to correct issues in our chosen video deinterlacer chip, do cost quite a bit. Even for Video processors, most companies just throw in an off-the-shelf chip and live with its limitations in quality and features. I just won’t do that for the Radiance line. I’m in this business because I am an enthusiast myself, and I have to admit that a lot of our customer’s suggestions get added to our products because they make my home theater picture better. … I know, I know … you all thought I was just being altruistic ;)

The main cost saving of the RadianceXS is that it will be a single board. The RadianceXD has three main PCBs. This added a lot of cost to connect them, assemble them, and have three manufacturing flows. The RadianceXS is going to be a single PCB, so it gives up the upgrade-ability of the RadianceXD. Having it in a 1U case, using the VisionHDQ case design (with some changes of course) will also save us some money. Economy of scale helps, and I would like to use the same IC’s, and connectors types, as in the RadianceXD. So the proposed 2 TOS, 6 COAX in, 2 COAX out audio configuration is specifically because it matches the RadianceXD.

Going to 1U significantly limits the back panel space, so I won’t have room for as many inputs. So, I am thinking I can fit a maximum of two optical TOS inputs. If I gave up something else I could add more. Certainly this is all a balancing act.

At some point soon I need to lock down the feature set so I can complete the schematic. I know there is no one feature set – that we could accommodate based on cost, and size -that meets everyone’s need. So, I just do the best I can to have an optimal feature set. I define this as what works for the largest set of people to provide the largest market for the price. And yes, I do need to avoid having all the features of the RadianceXD for a significantly lower price.

So please keep the RadianceXS suggestions and votes coming in.

BTW: It will be black. I will consider a silver option.

I KNEW you couldn't be such a nice guy! I'm going to upgrade my Radiance and play with the CMS and CTEMP adjustments this afternoon.

Any progress on the black front panels for the XDs?

Tim

I would also like to know when you expect the next batch of black faceplates for the XD to be available. Thanks.

I didn't realise the first batch had shipped. I do recall being one of the first to put in a request. Have you sent any to Gordon yet Jim, if not when could I expect to see one in the UK?

It looks great BTW.

Tim

jrp, keep up what you are doing..I for one would not want it any other way and, to that end, am publicly happy to say so...

My vote for the XS would be to make it as cheap as possible while keeping the quality, ie: dropping extra audio inputs. I'd use my pre-amp to do the audio switching. One other difference that seems to have come out though, is the inability to upgrade the internal boards, for instance, HDMI 1.3. Is that correct Jim? So the XS won't have the same future proofing as the XD?

My vote for the XS would be to make it as cheap as possible while keeping the quality, ie: dropping extra audio inputs. I'd use my pre-amp to do the audio switching. One other difference that seems to have come out though, is the inability to upgrade the internal boards, for instance, HDMI 1.3. Is that correct Jim? So the XS won't have the same future proofing as the XD?

Exactly my same sentiments, as I wrote earlier. The 1.3 should be a part of it since those chips are out now. I don't know about the price of those chips as opposed to the 1.1 chips, but I am pretty sure that by the time the XS begins production the 1.3 should be cheap enough.

y'know... i'm probably in the minority here...

but i'd like to see something that only deals with "modern" technology... no s-video... no composite... no spdif... no component even... just 4-6 hdmi inputs and 2 hdmi outputs...

like i said... i'm probably in the minority... but that would really appeal to me...

More info on the XS. Sounds like an interesting alternative to the XD at a lower price, although how much lower won't be known for some time, of course.

Can i still vote for blending function for the XD :D .

Athanasios

The main cost saving of the RadianceXS is that it will be a single board. The RadianceXD has three main PCBs. This added a lot of cost to connect them, assemble them, and have three manufacturing flows. The RadianceXS is going to be a single PCB, so it gives up the upgrade-ability of the RadianceXD.
Ah, thank you for this piece of information! Of course the upgradability increases the attractiveness of the XD... Actually in my book it'll be the single most important difference between XS and XD. That'll be a tough decision to make for us consumers! :) Here's one thought which you might not like but I'll post it nevertheless:

If the XS is not upgradable, you might want to consider going to HDMI 1.3 with the XS from the get go. I know your standpoint about how it's not much use. But since the XS is meant to target the enthusiast AVS market I believe HDMI 1.3 will be demanded by many potential customers, even if it doesn't bring much extra benefit in real life. And if you don't go HDMI 1.3, you'll likely be stuck with a non-HDMI-1.3 VP for a while, which might put you at a competitive disadvantage. Well, just my thoughts, take them with a pinch of salt... :D P.S: Of course if HDMI 1.3 adds noticable license/hardware costs per unit over HDMI 1.1, that'd be a good argument for not using it in the XS.

Exactly my same sentiments, as I wrote earlier. The 1.3 should be a part of it since those chips are out now. I don't know about the price of those chips as opposed to the 1.1 chips, but I am pretty sure that by the time the XS begins production the 1.3 should be cheap enough.

+1

Proposed specs for the XS are excellent for me but I would like it to be hdmi 1.3.

Since the XS will not be upgradable, it need to be hdmi 1.3 to pass bitstream HD audio (even without lip-sync, since the Radiance video part performance make lip-sync almost useless for mainstream) and allow pass-thru of any signal (audio and video) compliant with HDMI 1.3 (to be future-proof).

Richard.

...
P.S: Of course if HDMI 1.3 adds noticable license/hardware costs per unit over HDMI 1.1, that'd be a good argument for not using it in the XS.

I totally agree with madshi BUT if think that even if HDMI 1.3 add cost over HDMI 1.1, it need to be here.

As Madshi said, don't stuck with a non-hdmi 1.3 unit. Same thing as DVI on the HDQ instead of HDMI. I'm sure that this unit is seen as a non-HDMI one even if it is HDMI capable over DVI.

Last year, the mandatory feature was HDMI (version was not important). This year, the mandatory feature is HDMI accepting 1080p24 and 7.1 LPCM.
And next year, the mandatory feature will be HDMI 1.3.

What's the targeted price for the XS ?

Richard.

...Any progress on the black front panels for the XDs?

Out first batch had low yield at the annodizer. The Stripping and reannodize process left what looked like "paint drips" on most of the panels. We are working with them to come up with a better process.

I hope we have more black face plates by the end of November.

The HDMI 1.1 verses 1.3 question is an important one for the RadianceXS. If we do go with HDMI 1.3, the RadianceXS will be delayed until after we add an HDMI 1.3 option for the RadianceXD.

No price or schedule have been set for the RadianceXS, and both will depend on the final feature set, and whether is it HDMI 1.3 ot 1.1.

Additional comments welcome.

Thanks Jim for such a quick reply !

Is there already a date for the RadianceXD HDMI 1.3 option ?

Richard.

Out first batch had low yield at the annodizer. The Stripping and reannodize process left what looked like "paint drips" on most of the panels. We are working with them to come up with a better process.

I hope we have more black face plates by the end of November.

Thanks Jim,

Having seen the pictures I'm salivating.

Tim

..... after we add an HDMI 1.3 option for the RadianceXD.......

Additional comments welcome.

Hi Jim !

When will be out the Radiance XD Production No Beta ???

I ask you this cause really interested in a fully implemented promised features XD and then, wait for the PRO version with SDI and HD-SDI support ( not interested in external converter ....wish the signal not converted in HDMI but processed directly as goted by MPG decoder ) and lasting with HDMI 1.3 option I'll be ready to make my order ! ;):cool:

Finally, please let me know when will be planned a Radiance XD PRO, Black, Fully featured, SDI/HD-SDI direct feed and HDMI 1.3 ???

Thanks very much
Roberto ;)

Roberto:

We are currently working to complete the production release software by the end of December. We might drop a feature ot two to make this happen. Also, this depends on not finding too many audio problems as more people start connecting to different equipment.

I'm sorry but I don't have any schedule for the RadiancePro.

---

On the HDMI verses HD-SDI discussion: I think the only advantage is going to be not having encryption on the HD-SDI signal. I believe the mods will all have to be done at the signal bus going to the HDMI transmitter. So, assuming the HDMI is in 4:2:2 mode, the picture will be identical with HDMI and HD-SDI. I suppose it's possible the source software could change video to PC levels in the HDMI transmitter and lose blacker-than-black and white-than-white. So it's not impossible the picture might be ever so slightly different with HD-SDI.

Unlike SD-SDI modes of DVD players, I just don't think the picture quality will be different. So I don't see the need for HD-SDI mods myself.

If someone wants to give me a specific counter example, I may change my mind.

Richard:

No date for the HDMI option for the RadianceXD. It will be a while though.

Roberto:

We are currently working to complete the production release software by the end of December. .........

I'm sorry but I don't have any schedule for the RadiancePro.

---

On the HDMI verses HD-SDI discussion: I think the only advantage is going to be not having encryption on the HD-SDI signal. ......

Unlike SD-SDI modes of DVD players, I just don't think the picture quality will be different. So I don't see the need for HD-SDI mods myself.

If someone wants to give me a specific counter example, I may change my mind.

Thanks Jim ! ;)
I'll be waiting for that date.

Really hoped to see a Pro version containing the hdmi 1.3 update and at least a 2 BNC connectors for SD-SDI.

At now, for HD-SDI, and in how someone intend to retrive it, I'm perfectly agree with you :cool:


Thanks again
Roberto

Thanks Jim ! ;)
... Really hoped to see a Pro version containing the hdmi 1.3 update and at least a 2 BNC connectors for SD-SDI.

The Pro version with have SD/HD-SDI inputs. Since we're going to have them, might as well make them HD-SDI.

The HDMI 1.1 verses 1.3 question is an important one for the RadianceXS. If we do go with HDMI 1.3, the RadianceXS will be delayed until after we add an HDMI 1.3 option for the RadianceXD.

I agree that if upgradeability is lost, then you should wait for 1.3, for two reasons: Like stated, advanced users will want 1.3 whether they need it or not. If they hold off buying your product because of a feature they don't need, it's still an issue you have to consider. You don't get paid for being right, if the customers don't buy the product... Second: Even though bitstream audio _shouldn't_ be needed, and PCM _should_ be just as viable an option, player manufacturers are still putting players on the market that can output TrueHD and DTS-HD as bitstream, but not as PCM. Because of this, HDMI 1.3 becomes an issue, even though it shouldn't be. To my knowledge, there still aren't any Blu-Ray player on the market that will output DTS HD MA as PCM via HDMI, only as bitstream. I find this very unfortunate, but that's just the way things are, so we have to deal with it. I believe HDMI 1.3 should be as high up on your priority list as you possibly can, even though I fully agree with you that it shouldn't be needed.

About your comments on being open and enthusiastic: I believe too many manufacturers try to build what they think the customer wants, instead of what they themselves would like to have. Great to see at least one company that doesn't work that way. If you can afford the openness short term, I'm convinced you will benefit long-term.

Ptto:

Thanks for the feedback. HDMI 1.3 is the biggest issue we have is deciding what to do for the RadianceXS.

If we go with HDMI 1.3 that, for me, puts the RadianceXS at a lower priority than the RadianceXD 1.3 upgrade, and potentially the RadiancePro. So, it would be delayed some. Still, I am getting enough feedback here and from dealers that it seems this is the path to take.

Ptto:

Thanks for the feedback. HDMI 1.3 is the biggest issue we have is deciding what to do for the RadianceXS.

If we go with HDMI 1.3 that, for me, puts the RadianceXS at a lower priority than the RadianceXD 1.3 upgrade, and potentially the RadiancePro. So, it would be delayed some. Still, I am getting enough feedback here and from dealers that it seems this is the path to take.

I would prefer 1.3 for the Radiance XD first to allow it to switch lossless audio.

Also, I think you once mentioned video delay. My preamp has an audio delay option so this would be a great fix.

- Rich

I would prefer 1.3 for the Radiance XD first to allow it to switch lossless audio.

Also, I think you once mentioned video delay. My preamp has an audio delay option so this would be a great fix.

- Rich
My 2c worth here - completely agree with Otto and Rich here. It's just impossible these days not to keep up with what the market perceives it needs - very little to do with reality as we all seem to agree on here. So, yes, please add the HDMI 1.3 upgrade to the XD ASAP. Much more important than the SD/HD SDI box add-on unit IMHO - and there's already one on the market anyway.

Moreover, I suspect that quite a few people are holding off on the XD until it has HDMI 1.3, especially now that we have been talking about an XDPro. I have a suspicion that once the XD has HDMI 1.3, there will be much less call for a Pro version. Only the CRT people will probably hang out for an analog output, even though you can buy some very reputable HDMI to RGBHV converter boxes right now.

Not sure what you mean here by the XD having video delay Rich. It does of course have an in-built video delay due to processing of the video signal (and the delay will vary depending on what the VP is doing wrt to chosen/required de-interlacing, scaling and noise reduction tasks). If the total delay adds up to more than a couple of tens of milliseconds, the VP will need to compensate for this delay by delaying the audio signal for a similar amount of time.

Additionally, if you send the signal to an amp or receiver that has no audio delay adjustment in it and your display takes a while to process the video signal it receives from the VP, having a user adjustable audio delay per input helps to keep sound and picture perfectly in sync. The VP simply adds its internal video delay for the chosen video format to the fixed delay set by the user. Works very well in the DVDO VP series. Sorry if I have misinterpreted your post here Rich.

My 2c worth here - completely agree with Otto and Rich here. It's just impossible these days not to keep up with what the market perceives it needs - very little to do with reality as we all seem to agree on here. So, yes, please add the HDMI 1.3 upgrade to the XD ASAP. Much more important than the SD/HD SDI box add-on unit IMHO - and there's already one on the market anyway.

Moreover, I suspect that quite a few people are holding off on the XD until it has HDMI 1.3, especially now that we have been talking about an XDPro. I have a suspicion that once the XD has HDMI 1.3, there will be much less call for a Pro version. Only the CRT people will probably hang out for an analog output, even though you can buy some very reputible HDMI to RGBHV converter boxes right now.

Not sure what you mean here by the XD having video delay Rich. It does of course have an in-built video delay due to processing of the video signal (and the delay will vary depending on what the VP is doing wrt to chosen/required de-interlacing, scaling and noise reduction tasks). If the total delay adds up to more than a couple of tens of milliseconds, the VP will need to compensate for this delay by delaying the audio signal for a similar amount of time.

Additionally, if you send the signal to an amp or receiver that has no audio delay adjustment in it and your display takes a while to process the video signal it receives from the VP, having a user adjustable audio delay per input helps to keep sound and picture perfectly in sync. The VP simply adds its internal video delay for the chosen video format to the fixed delay set by the user. Works very well in the DVDO VP series. Sorry if I have misinterpreted your post here Rich.


I am 100% with you on the 1.3. I think it is a must for something that is to be cutting edge and the reason is for sending HD audio for decoding.

My problem is the new Onkyo Pro 885 has a Reon in it and minimum processing. The Preamp seems to be running at least 60ms that cannot be removed. So it is not a Lumagen issue, but I would be thrilled if video delay could be set in the Lumagen to correct it.

- Rich

.......My problem is the new Onkyo Pro 885 has a Reon in it and minimum processing. The Preamp seems to be running at least 60ms that cannot be removed. So it is not a Lumagen issue, but I would be thrilled if video delay could be set in the Lumagen to correct it.

- Rich
Ah, I get you now - the shoe is on the other foot for once - too much audio delay. You need a much slower VP here Rich - an earlier Lumagen, Pixel Magic or DVDO VP :D:).

Ptto:

.....

If we go with HDMI 1.3 that, for me, puts the RadianceXS at a lower priority than the RadianceXD 1.3 upgrade, and potentially the RadiancePro. So, it would be delayed some. Still, I am getting enough feedback here and from dealers that it seems this is the path to take.
I too vote for this ! ;)
Priority:
* RADIANCE XD
* RADIANCE XD PRO ( book me for one :D :cool:)
* RADIANCE XS

:cool:

Hey what about the RADIANCE XS PRO ? :p

How about the Radiance XD.1 for the new model with the 1.3 HDMI option ;)

- Rich

Rich,

"I would prefer 1.3 for the Radiance XD first to allow it to switch lossless audio."

The Radiance does this now. It can pass up to 8 channels of lossless PCM.

Shawn

Unlike SD-SDI modes of DVD players, I just don't think the picture quality will be different. So I don't see the need for HD-SDI mods myself.

If someone wants to give me a specific counter example, I may change my mind.


When I set up my HT 6 years ago I placed the PJ and VP in a soffit at the rear of the room and the rest of the equipment at the front. It is 45' cable run from front to rear through a soffit with four 90 degree bends. Sources are an SDI DVD player and an RCA HD sat receiver using RGBHV. Plus there are runs of S-video and component which are not used.

I am now looking to upgrade which means two runs of HDMI for new DVD and sat receiver. I think it will be nearly impossible to pull HDMI cable through my soffit because of the turns, so I can go two routes: convert the HDMI to cat5 or go to HDSDI. Conversion requires two cables and two boxes for each source at $500 per source. HDSDI would be a single run with no conversion.

Apparently there is no problem buying HDSDI DVD players although a combi Blue Ray/HD-DVD player (my first choice) does not seem to be currently available. I think they will be as the format war now seems to be a stalemate.

Unfortunately I have not been able to find an HDSDI sat receiver so there I will have to go to HDMI/cat5 conversion.

Anyway that is why I need SDI/HDSDI: to avoid pulling long HDMI cable runs. As a bonus I would avoid all the handshake and connector problems and possibly get a better image.

Would an HDMI to cat5 conversion and back again cause any signal degradation?

"I would prefer 1.3 for the Radiance XD first to allow it to switch lossless audio."

The Radiance does this now. It can pass up to 8 channels of lossless PCM.



The issue with this is, that if all player manufacturers designed their players properly, the Radiance would be just fine with 1.1. Sadly, they don't. A lot of players can't convert TrueHD or DTS-HD to 8 channel PCM, but do output those formats as bitstream, via HDMI 1.3. I can only assume that the manufacturers do this to sell more receivers. It makes no sense whatsoever to keep insisting on sending bitstream to the receiver. Using 8 channel PCM would allow us to buy a high quality audio processor with HDMI input, and never worry about it being out of date due to upcoming audio standards - any new standards would just be converted to PCM in the source. Instead, the manufacturers insist on putting the decoders in the receivers, where they imho don't belong. To my knowledge, no blu-ray player can decode DTS-HD to PCM, but there are some that can pass it as a bitstream, and there are receivers that will decode it. Because of this, we do need HDMI 1.3 in the video processor asap. We shouldn't - but it just so happens that we do, and that's what we have to deal with.

Yeah !
This is what happens at now ! :o

"To my knowledge, no blu-ray player can decode DTS-HD to PCM, but there are some that can pass it as a bitstream, and there are receivers that will decode it. Because of this, we do need HDMI 1.3 in the video processor asap. We shouldn't - but it just so happens that we do, and that's what we have to deal with."

So for those that have to pass bitstream why not just put the Radiance behind the receiver? A receiver should be able to take the bitstream input and just pass out regular HDMI video to the Radiance and then on to the display.

Shawn

Plans for the RadianceXS include the following:
4 HDMI in
2 component in
2 composite in
2 SVideo in
1 HDMI out
1 SPDIF out

I'd agree with the 1U voters (and black!). Space is at a premium, and in so long as 1U does not create any heat issues, this would be the way to go for my needs. Of course, since I own the XD, these are hypothetical, but I was someone who once upon a time sold my HDP and bought an HDQ in order to get the shorter form factor... :) HDMI 1.3 is, unfortunately, probably also a necessity, if only for the audio issues already mentioned.

One thought on the inputs, above, I don't really see the need for Svideo, but there is a case for a configurable 5xBNC/RCA group where you can get 1xRGBHV or 1xYPbPr + 1xS-Vid (dual BNC/RCA) or 1xYPbPr + 2xComposite out of each group of 5. If you can't do the above, I would drop S-video support altogether for space and cost reasons.

Bill

So for those that have to pass bitstream why not just put the Radiance behind the receiver? A receiver should be able to take the bitstream input and just pass out regular HDMI video to the Radiance and then on to the display.Clumsy workaround IMHO, as this takes away from the XD's role as a switch.

(A more interesting question would be, why do people think their audio equipment will reveal differences between say DD+ and TrueHD. But I won't go there. Oops too late.)

Clumsy workaround IMHO, as this takes away from the XD's role as a switch.
And it also takes away the chance of applying different settings for different sources (e.g. Blu-Ray player might need a color space fix while HD DVD player doesn't or vice versa).

And it also takes away the chance of applying different settings for different sources (e.g. Blu-Ray player might need a color space fix while HD DVD player doesn't or vice versa).

I assume the Radiance has the same multiple memories per input as the HDx line, so that would solve that problem. I run XA2/BR to my receiver first to get PCM audio, then to a single input on my HDQ - the 4 memories, while a little tight for 2 devices, do allow for different settings.

So for those that have to pass bitstream why not just put the Radiance behind the receiver? A receiver should be able to take the bitstream input and just pass out regular HDMI video to the Radiance and then on to the display.



Because this eliminates a few of the advantages for using the Radiance: Switching would be carried out in the receier (and do you have enough inputs?) Perhaps the receiver doesn't pass through 1080P, or like the one I have now (with hi-res audio) that passes 1080P/60 but not 1080P/24.

It's still a reasonable solution nonetheless, just not the optimum one. It's not how the Radiance was intended to be used.

The Radiance has so many memories that using a simple RS232 or IR macro would make using one input pretty seamless.

Interesting point re overseas sales not being legit. Why would an American manufacturer use autoranging AC when the US has only 120V.

Clumsy workaround IMHO, as this takes away from the XD's role as a switch.

(A more interesting question would be, why do people think their audio equipment will reveal differences between say DD+ and TrueHD. But I won't go there. Oops too late.)

Sensible setup I think. With RS232 you can detect and deal with different sources in this type of setup. I dont see audio switching as a VPs job.

...... I dont see audio switching as a VPs job.

IMHO, if a VP is used as Switcher, it must switchs all ! Not video only ;)
Otherwise, will arise difficulties and complex configs :(

In other words, Sources must be routed in the VP in order to have the VP both switch them and keep individual settings in the video part, in Audio, the respective selected source must pass the signal to VP, that if needed will sync too by lips sync function, and pass the signal to the out hdmi connector in order to be later decoded by a receiver ;)

Interesting point re overseas sales not being legit. Why would an American manufacturer use autoranging AC when the US has only 120V.

I didn't say that. It's just that you have to go through a local dealer. You're not supposed to order directly from the US.

Sensible setup I think. With RS232 you can detect and deal with different sources in this type of setup. I dont see audio switching as a VPs job.

:confused:

If you place the receiver in front of the XD, you take away the video switching as well. Is that outside the role of the vp as well?

Having had the XD for a few months and it being the first video processor I've owned that could really switch all audio & video sources it has made me re-think the way I switch things. I've had an Integra Research DTR-10.5 receiver acting as the hub/switch for everything and it has worked well. The two have redundant functions now and frankly I think the XD is better with more control. I'm considering downgrading to some audio/seperates since having HDMI switching is no longer a top need in a a pre-amp.

The Radiance has so many memories that using a simple RS232 or IR macro would make using one input pretty seamless.

I have been considering a "virtual input" concept. This was originally intended for Radiance units with four HDMI inputs that still allowed six total "virtual HDMI inputs". There would be the physical HDMI inputs (say one, two, or four). Then the virtual inputs would be the remaining and would be assigned to select physical HDMI input 1.

For a Radiance with one HDMI input, you would switch HDMI inputs in the amp. If the amp converted analog inputs to HDMI, without mucking them up their scaling, you could also use this for analog video. Then you could have six (potenially more) virtual inputs for the various sources coming through the amp. This makes the "amp first" connection scheme work well. It would then mean that HDMI 1.1 could still be used, since the amp would get the 1.3 bitstream if desired.

I have been considering a "virtual input" concept. This was originally intended for Radiance units with four HDMI inputs that still allowed six total "virtual HDMI inputs". There would be the physical HDMI inputs (say one, two, or four). Then the virtual inputs would be the remaining and would be assigned to select physical HDMI input 1.

For a Radiance with one HDMI input, you would switch HDMI inputs in the amp. If the amp converted analog inputs to HDMI, without mucking them up their scaling, you could also use this for analog video. Then you could have six (potenially more) virtual inputs for the various sources coming through the amp. This makes the "amp first" connection scheme work well. It would then mean that HDMI 1.1 could still be used, since the amp would get the 1.3 bitstream if desired.
This would be a great idea for a lower cost unit. Understanding which virtual input you were seeing would be a question to tackle first, since it is unlikely that you could completely auto-detect everything needed. Discrete codes that could be tied to changing inputs on the receiver would be a good start, but some direct link would always be better (e.g., HDMI-CEC/HDAVI/Etc.).

The problem is that there are a number of receivers out there that do Bad Things to video, especially when it comes to color. One of our users posted a pretty significant color contamination problem with some of the new Onkyo receivers that have what should be fairly high quality video processing (Reon). To get accurate colors, you had to disable the processing and turn off the OSD, IIRC, which defeats the whole point of having something like that. It would be great if a "downstream" VP could correct errors like that, but I have no idea of the range of problems that are out there and what would be involved in a fix.

Bill

IMHO, if a VP is used as Switcher, it must switchs all ! Not video only ;)
Otherwise, will arise difficulties and complex configs :(

In other words, Sources must be routed in the VP in order to have the VP both switch them and keep individual settings in the video part, in Audio, the respective selected source must pass the signal to VP, that if needed will sync too by lips sync function, and pass the signal to the out hdmi connector in order to be later decoded by a receiver ;)

This is not true as long as the VP can keep video delay constant. Any receiver worth its salt has a fixed lip synch delay per input. With HDMI 1.3 I think the fixed delay is 30ms unless the source specifies otherwise. With older sources a constant delay could be acheived as well (Lumagen only has to keep VP delay constant for film and video).

To me it seems the audio inputs are simply unecessary and just another place where jitter and compatiblity problems can arise.

I have been considering a "virtual input" concept. This was originally intended for Radiance units with four HDMI inputs that still allowed six total "virtual HDMI inputs". There would be the physical HDMI inputs (say one, two, or four). Then the virtual inputs would be the remaining and would be assigned to select physical HDMI input 1.

For a Radiance with one HDMI input, you would switch HDMI inputs in the amp. If the amp converted analog inputs to HDMI, without mucking them up their scaling, you could also use this for analog video. Then you could have six (potenially more) virtual inputs for the various sources coming through the amp. This makes the "amp first" connection scheme work well. It would then mean that HDMI 1.1 could still be used, since the amp would get the 1.3 bitstream if desired.
Maybe it does make sense to think the XS concept over:

(1) Do you design it to be able to sit in front of the receiver in the chain? In that case I think you need to fully support audio switching and HDMI 1.3 and all the bells and whitles.

(2) Or do you design the XS to strictly sit behind the receiver? In that case you should be *VERY* strict and drop all inputs and outputs except 1 HDMI input and one HDMI output. HDMI 1.1 might even do in this case. You could also totally drop any audio processing and audio circuits. You wouldn't even need to pass audio through.

Approach (2) absolutely is a viable approach, but only if you're strict and only if that allows you to *noticably* reduce the XS price. If you can do that, people could buy the XS and put the saved money into a better receiver with good switching support. That could actually be a win for everyone. And it sounds like a very future proof solution. But IMHO the key is: Can you afford to be strict enough? And would that allow you to lower costs noticably?

Maybe it does make sense to think the XS concept over:

(1) Do you design it to be able to sit in front of the receiver in the chain? In that case I think you need to fully support audio switching and HDMI 1.3 and all the bells and whitles.

(2) Or do you design the XS to strictly sit behind the receiver? In that case you should be *VERY* strict and drop all inputs and outputs except 1 HDMI input and one HDMI output. HDMI 1.1 might even do in this case. You could also totally drop any audio processing and audio circuits. You wouldn't even need to pass audio through.

Approach (2) absolutely is a viable approach, but only if you're strict and only if that allows you to *noticably* reduce the XS price. If you can do that, people could buy the XS and put the saved money into a better receiver with good switching support. That could actually be a win for everyone. And it sounds like a very future proof solution. But IMHO the key is: Can you afford to be strict enough? And would that allow you to lower costs noticably?
I think this would be a third product (Radiance Light?), rather than the XS. It does solve the issue of having an imbalance between the VP's capabilities and the demands for the receiver.

Bill

Maybe it does make sense to think the XS concept over:

(1) Do you design it to be able to sit in front of the receiver in the chain? In that case I think you need to fully support audio switching and HDMI 1.3 and all the bells and whitles.

(2) Or do you design the XS to strictly sit behind the receiver? In that case you should be *VERY* strict and drop all inputs and outputs except 1 HDMI input and one HDMI output. HDMI 1.1 might even do in this case. You could also totally drop any audio processing and audio circuits. You wouldn't even need to pass audio through.

Approach (2) absolutely is a viable approach, but only if you're strict and only if that allows you to *noticably* reduce the XS price. If you can do that, people could buy the XS and put the saved money into a better receiver with good switching support. That could actually be a win for everyone. And it sounds like a very future proof solution. But IMHO the key is: Can you afford to be strict enough? And would that allow you to lower costs noticably?

Second that motion.

...(2) Or do you design the XS to strictly sit behind the receiver? In that case you should be *VERY* strict and drop all inputs and outputs except 1 HDMI input and one HDMI output. HDMI 1.1 might even do in this case. ...

Approach (2) absolutely is a viable approach, but only if you're strict and only if that allows you to *noticably* reduce the XS price. If you can do that, people could buy the XS and put the saved money into a better receiver with good switching support. That could actually be a win for everyone. And it sounds like a very future proof solution. But IMHO the key is: Can you afford to be strict enough? And would that allow you to lower costs noticably?

It might need to have one component, one composite and one SVideo input for amps that do not digitize analog video for output on HDMI.

I also worry, as the problem was raised here, about receiver manufacturers who are so focused on audio, that even when they try to do video they mess it up. This makes our job much harder and depending on what they do to the video we might not be able to undo their bad processing.

Probably would not call this the RadianceXS. It would be significantly cheaper than a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS with input/output as I have shared earlier. I think this also comes closer to meeting the request for a calibration only box - except of course it is a full-blown single-input video processor.

Please understand this is a just what-if analysis at this point. We have no plans for such a product.

Jim, in my mind, hdmi 1.3 implementation coul be really more easy ....

At now, XD can send over hdmi output 2 the audio signal of the input sources.

The problem at now will arise for the new 2 DTS HD and DD TRU HD that require the more wide hdmi bit space of 1.3 standard.

If you put all hdmi input/output compilant to 1.3 standard, we are able to transparent work like now, in getting audio from hdmi out 2 to send to a receiver to decode it ;)

According to the standard, if source is 1.3 compilant, XD will pass it as is through its output and the game is done ! ;)
Thanks very much

It might need to have one component, one composite and one SVideo input for amps that do not digitize analog video for output on HDMI.

I also worry, as the problem was raised here, about receiver manufacturers who are so focused on audio, that even when they try to do video they mess it up. This makes our job much harder and depending on what they do to the video we might not be able to undo their bad processing.
There are also source devices which damage the video data. I wouldn't worry too much about that. It's the job of us consumers to be informed which source devices and which receivers are behaving correctly and to buy accordingly.

Furthermore, if it was my call, I'd absolutely drop any analog inputs (and circuits). If a customer needs analog video inputs, he either has to buy a receiver which supports those or he has to buy a RadianceXS/XD. Nothing wrong with that. I'd really try to save any pence of hardware cost you can. The lower the hardware costs, the better. And I imagine not having to integrate *any* analog circuits should help making the design simpler/cheaper.

Of course these are just my thoughts. Take them with a grain of salt, please... :)

Probably would not call this the RadianceXS. It would be significantly cheaper than a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS with input/output as I have shared earlier. I think this also comes closer to meeting the request for a calibration only box - except of course it is a full-blown single-input video processor.

Please understand this is a just what-if analysis at this point. We have no plans for such a product.
I understand. Personally, I'd greatly welcome such a device, though.

I think there's one big reason why this is a good time for such a new concept: Most of us home cinema freaks are on the verge of buying new receivers because we want/need to have receivers which support HD audio inputs. Most of the receivers we own do not support that yet. Personally, I'm also considering buying a new receiver right now. So if we consumers knew that we need to buy a receiver which has enough video inputs and which doesn't harm video quality then we could easily take that into consideration for the new receiver we plan to buy soon, anyway.

My two cents: I would love to have devices that are specialized into their specific task and do it flawlessly.
DVD readed: read what it is written on the disk and transmit it as it. No decoders included.
Video projectors : just take the image from the input and transfer it on the screen. The processing shall be very limited and should be bypassable. It should have multiple inputs, be quiet, and have a very high quality light path with real glass.
The audio processor shall decode audio coming digitally and unprocessed from the source.
The video processor shall manage video coming from the sources unprocessed as well.
The two functions might be executed in the same device if the manufacturer has the necessary skills.

Today we are in a situation in which each single equipement in the chain has his own circuits and we end up with at least two decoding boards for audio (the source and the audio processor) and three for the video (the source, the receiver and the projector)... here are the real savings and quality improvements...

Regards. Lenny

Maybe it does make sense to think the XS concept over:

(1) Do you design it to be able to sit in front of the receiver in the chain? In that case I think you need to fully support audio switching and HDMI 1.3 and all the bells and whitles.

(2) Or do you design the XS to strictly sit behind the receiver? In that case you should be *VERY* strict and drop all inputs and outputs except 1 HDMI input and one HDMI output. HDMI 1.1 might even do in this case. You could also totally drop any audio processing and audio circuits. You wouldn't even need to pass audio through.



I prefere the first solution with a video processor sending video to the display and audio to the receiver.

-it makes a per-source calibration and per-source parameters possible.
-there is only 2 HDMI cables between source and display instead of 3 (if the scaler has 2 hdmi output which would be interesting even on the XS if not too costly).
- analog-digital conversion has to be done by the video processor and not a receiver.

I would also like an audio only receiver with hdmi 1.3 input ;)

Richard.

My XS vote:-

I like the idea of virtual inputs, as this allows multiple sources thru an external HDMI switch into one (each) VP input.

I think you will needlessly restrict the audience for the XS if you assume the AV amp/receiver has HDMI, let alone up-conversion of analogue to HDMI.

Another input switching topology, has the VP 'beside' the AV amp/receiver, with the former switching video, and the latter handling audio, in parallel. This is my preferred configuration. However, I would add crossover, whereby some video is also switched in the AV amp, and routed to the VP. So, this approach is a hybrid of 'beside' and 'after/behind'.

I'd definitely like to see, three or more HDMI (version 1 is OK) inputs, one HDMI loop-thru (like Themescene HD3000, which uses Gennum too), and one HDMI output; two each of Component, S-Video, and Composite, with very high quality Y/C separator. The addition of virtual inputs, would support expansion by, for example, the use of external HDMI switchers, or HDMI equipped AV amps, etc.

Also, an IR learning capability, would allow the VP to learn remote IR commands used to select source devices on an AV amp or HDMI switch, and select the appropriate physical/virtual input on the VP.

If HDMI 1.3 and/or audio switching is required, the XD can be bought, and these features constitute a reasonable product differentiation.

I have an Onkyo Pro 885 preamplifier with 4 HDMI inputs and two outputs.

If is a nice product but definitely a 1.0. Video processing is basic with color, brightness, deinterlacing, and noise reduction. These functions are not available on screen. I bought it to get HD audio. The Reon VX when engaged, is slow. It blanks the screen for at least 4 seconds when the source resolution changes. Strangely enough, it introduces audio delay that is a pain to work around. So I am already here. If you put the Preamp in pass-though mode, it switched in < 1 second.

For now, I am sending the TiVo S3 to the Preamp first when to the Lumagen. For this solution, I think virtual inputs would be great.

I think that a lower end/complimentary product would be nice. I love the idea of a video turbo added just before the display. A product about in the range of 1K to 1.5K would be great. Sort of the video processor equivalent of the Flea.

Now that the Receiver/Preamp has a video processor adding a Turbo makes sense. At 1K, I think Lumagen would sell a lot of them. To give you an idea, Onkyo/Integra had a firmware update to fix video processing was released. One forum member has personally sent out about 1000 copies of the firmware. I think the end users react better to buying a complementary addition to their system than one that only partially duplicates functionality.

- Rich

My two cents: I would love to have devices that are specialized into their specific task and do it flawlessly.
DVD reader: read what it is written on the disk and transmit it as it. No decoders included.I would say a disc reader should read what's on the disc and decode into a standard format. That way sources, processors, and sinks can be cleanly separated, each handling their own thing and using lossless standards to communicate. Constantly hacking support for transmitting, passing, and decoding new formats into every device in the chain becomes unnecessary (unless you are a vendor trying to sell more receivers).

I assume your player doesn't transmit encoded MPEG or AVC video straight from the disc—it decodes it first. Imagine what a terror it would be to find a display that supported every video encoding format the disc might have used. I think it's proper for the player to decode audio to PCM as well, and then nothing else has to care how the audio was encoded for burning onto shiny plastic.

Maybe enough people care about HDMI 1.3 that it's ultimately necessary to market a product, but not everyone does. Someone needed to say it.

"Perhaps the receiver doesn't pass through 1080P, or like the one I have now (with hi-res audio) that passes 1080P/60 but not 1080P/24."

If you are outputting 1080p from the Radiance then having the Radiance ahead of the receiver wouldn't work at all in this case either. Only way to deal with that situation is to feed 1080i through the receiver to the Radiance where it would spit out 1080p.

Shawn

Are the rack ears available and does any have a rough idea of price? I need to order another shelf or two for my rack, and want to decide whether I want a dedicated shelf w/ a custom Middle Atlantic faceplate or use the rack ears for the Radiance.

thanks,
aaron

Are the rack ears available and does any have a rough idea of price? I need to order another shelf or two for my rack, and want to decide whether I want a dedicated shelf w/ a custom Middle Atlantic faceplate or use the rack ears for the Radiance.

thanks,
aaronI bought the rack ears through AVS at the same time as the XD. They were about $40, so far less than the MA shelf. I suspect that the MA shelf would probably have to be 4U to get a cutout around the face of the XD which is exactly 3U (I have a 1U cable box that takes 2U in the custom MA shelf for example).

I bought the rack ears through AVS at the same time as the XD. They were about $40, so far less than the MA shelf. I suspect that the MA shelf would probably have to be 4U to get a cutout around the face of the XD which is exactly 3U (I have a 1U cable box that takes 2U in the custom MA shelf for example).

Thanks, I guess I should have asked about these when I ordered my unit from AVS. I'll order them up tomorrow... and yes, a much cheaper option than the shelf + faceplate.

How are those 4 configuration memories setup ?

With a C2 you have dynamicvp where you can specify things like:
-when input is 1080i60 film, than output 1080p24
-when input is 1080i50 then output 1080p50
-when input is 480i then output 1080p60
- else output 1080p60

This works very nice, and is much better than having to select a preset yourself.
How is this done on a Lumagen ?

Was this question ever answered?

The Crystalio II can be setup to automatically output 1080p24 if the source is film and 1080p60 if the source is video.

I am looking at getting a Sony 52XBR5 which is a true 120hz LCD meaning that it can perform 5:5 on film based sources. The problem is that the Sony fails the 1080i60 film deinterlacing tests. I would get the Crystalio, but it does not have digital noise reduction(mosquito, block artifacts, etc.) like the Radiance and my cable provider compresses the crap out of the signal here.

Was this question ever answered?

The Crystalio II can be setup to automatically output 1080p24 if the source is film and 1080p60 if the source is video.

I am looking at getting a Sony 52XBR5 which is a true 120hz LCD meaning that it can perform 5:5 on film based sources. The problem is that the Sony fails the 1080i60 film deinterlacing tests. I would get the Crystalio, but it does not have digital noise reduction(mosquito, block artifacts, etc.) like the Radiance and my cable provider compresses the crap out of the signal here.

Yes, the Radiance can do this...

The Crystalio II can be setup to automatically output 1080p24 if the source is film and 1080p60 if the source is video.My understanding is that, at the moment, the CII 60i -> 24p processing isn't particularly reliable. To be fair, 24p genlock is not yet in the Radiance, but Lumagen have a fine track record in this area with the Vision series.

Sidb,

that's what I meant. Minimize all the circuits into the audio and video chain and put the money on one high end circuit for each task. I'm dreaming I know.

Lenny

My DVD reader outputs video in component YPbPr only (no deintrelacing nor scaling) and the audio SPDIF over digital coaxial or optical output. It has just the minimum circuits needed to work.

......My DVD reader outputs video in component YPbPr only (no deintrelacing nor scaling) and the audio SPDIF over digital coaxial or optical output. It has just the minimum circuits needed to work.
That's one D/A too many :).

Presently I use a KDS HDL in my system for over 3 1/2 yrs now.

The two primary reasons for my installing this unit was its scaling capability and running two displays (not at once mind you).

Here is the set up currently:

Inputs
- Cable STB (set to 1080i) connects to KDS HDL via "Component HD".
- Denon DVD5900 (set to 4801, allowing the KDS HDL to do the processing) connects to the KDS HDL via "Component SD"
- will also consider future HD-DVD or BR player

Outputs
- Samsung HL507N RPTV connects to the KDS HDL via DVI out (only one)
- DWIN TV3+ (runs through the TRANSVISION scaler I/O box first --- which appears to be on the fritz...) via RGBHV Output 1

Now I'm looking to upgrade the PJ (RPTV will stay for now) with the SIM2 HT380 or HT3000E so how can I pull this off today?

Again the goal is to switch the source components to two different display types as well as have some future proofing for HDMI sources coming down the road.



Mike

my bad this should have been a new thread...

For those waiting for a review, apologies, but it's going to take some time - I'm not even sure it's worth it in the XDs current state, as a lot of menus are still disabled. (I don't have the latest firmware so I know a few more things have been enabled, but still).

As for first impressions, I'll just say this; the menus are not the most user friendly I've ever seen. On the other hand I was able to plug all my stuff and get it all up and running (including sound) without any trouble... except for the input thing mentioned above :)

I'm off to actually reading the manual.


Any chance of a review yet Dave or are you enjoying yourself too much :D

A quick question for you guys.. I have a CIH setup with VPL-VW60. The projector has 2.35:1 support internally. I have ordered the RadianceXD beta and I'm anxiously waiting for the delivery, which is sometime this week.

Currently the Anamorphic Zoom available in VPL-VW60 is stretching the HD content more than it should. When I watch Football, the top line that has the score is not visible. Though there are other modes that can do the job (fill the screen without too much vertical scaling), they are not as good as the Anamorphic Zoom.

Would RadianceXD differentiate between a 16:9 HD content vs an anamorphic movie stored as 16:9 with black bars above & below. Are there settings that are available in the unit to specify this. Appreciate your feedback

Any chance of a review yet Dave or are you enjoying yourself too much :D

Well I'm out of town right now, so no :)

As for the review, it'll have to wait a bit. Several reasons for this:
- custom timings are not implemented yet, so I cannot output to my plasma in its native resolution, and thus I cannot judge scaling performance
- I ordered an eye-one display LT so I can start using the CMS features, but there's a learning process there
- even though the XD is highly functional and overall very stable (and discovered bugs are squashed promptly), there are still too many missing features for a review to be worth anything, most notably the Gennum image enhancement features are not implemented yet

Other than that, the XD works great. As a switcher it's fantastic, very fast as it keeps every hdcp connection alive. Reduces cable clutter since you can redirect audio any which way you want. Deinterlacing is flawless, as far as I can tell. But again, the big value I feel is in the CMS. I had always suspected that my plasma's colors were way out of whack, and displaying a few test patterns (gray scale) revealed how awful it truly was. So I will be working on a review with some before/after pictures, but it'll be a while. Hope this helps.

Escon, you realize that I'm a kind of old fascioned guy: my DVD reader has not a digital video output.... ;-)
Lenny

Cheers Dave. Can you tell me if your version does the following;
Handles HD audio via pcm/HDMI
Allows 1080/24 input/output
Changes 1080/60 to 1080/24
Has a suite of test patterns
Thanks

Cheers Dave. Can you tell me if your version does the following;
Handles HD audio via pcm/HDMIIf by 'handles' you mean 'transmits' then yes.

Allows 1080/24 input/output
Changes 1080/60 to 1080/24I believe 24p input is possible, but 24p output/genlock hasn't been implemented yet. It's planned though.

Has a suite of test patternsYes, quite extensive.

I worked with a RadianceXD on a Sony VPL-VW60 tonight and the results were amazing. This processor is fabulous for fixing color problems. I saw zero negative effects from using it. I did find a few bugs, but I was able to work around them.

Jeff:

Please make sure to report any bugs to us at support@lumagen.com, or use the Beta forum.

Thanks.

Jim:

A couple weeks ago....You mentioned adding some microblocking and/or noise reduction features. Anymore information?

Ron

Thank Dave. By HD audio I mean the ability to take a DD HD and DTS master audio signal via PCM and output to a suitable receiver

Thank Dave. By HD audio I mean the ability to take a DD HD and DTS master audio signal via PCM and output to a suitable receiver

A PCM signal can be handled by hdmi 1.1 - it doesn't matter what it's extracted from - so the XD can definitely do that. The problem would be that very few players can decode the lossless sound formats right now. See this highdef digest article (http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1064).

I don't give a damn about HDMI 1.3. I just want something that isn't as expensive as the XD that will fix my JVC color problems once and for all. Anamorphic stretch too! HDMI switching, PCM audio is fine, work with my PS3 and cable box. I'm golden. I'm happy. Can I have it tomorrow. I don't need much more.

Incidentally, how hard would it be to add a second HDMI output that scales to a different resolution. I don't like turning my projector on just to see the OSD on on my PS3.

Jim:

A couple weeks ago....You mentioned adding some microblocking and/or noise reduction features. Anymore information?

Ron

The next feature release is for adding the analog RGBHV, RGBS, and RGsB input modes. This should be next week, as we are in bug-fix mode this week.

The (Gennum) image enhancement controls are scheduled for the feature release after that. Should have these in by the end of November.

I don't give a damn about HDMI 1.3. I just want something that isn't as expensive as the XD that will fix my JVC color problems once and for all. Anamorphic stretch too! HDMI switching, PCM audio is fine, work with my PS3 and cable box. I'm golden. I'm happy. Can I have it tomorrow. I don't need much more.

Incidentally, how hard would it be to add a second HDMI output that scales to a different resolution. I don't like turning my projector on just to see the OSD on on my PS3.

I tend to agree with you on HDMI 1.3, but we seem to be in the minority. I have dropped the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXS, and pushing forward on the HDMI 1.3 RadianceXD. Later we will add a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS to the lineup.

If you can use DVI-D for video (say by having the video processor after the amp), you may be able to get all these features VisionHDP, VisionHDQ or VisionPro HDP. This is because I am considering adding primary gamut controls for these Vision series processors (this is in addition to the 11-point parametric grayscale and color/hue/offsets already implemented for these).

Not a done deal yet, but now that we have it in the Radiance, we know how big the logic is, and believe we can fit it in the (HDP/HDQ/Pro) Vision series FPGA.

On the Radiance second simultaneous output resolution: We are considering this for the RadiancePro, but the FPGA in the RadianceXD is not big enough. However, you can use a second memory and temporarily change the output resolution so you can view the image using the other HDMI output driving a monitor to avoid turning on your projector. Then just reselect the primary configuration memory when you turn your projector on.

Jim,

"This is because I am considering adding primary gamut controls for these Vision series processors (this is in addition to the 11-point parametric grayscale and color/hue/offsets already implemented for these)."

If you can fit that into them that would seriously increase the value of those units.

"On the Radiance second simultaneous output resolution: We are considering this for the RadiancePro, but the FPGA in the RadianceXD is not big enough."

What about if the second output used the Gennum scaling instead of Lumagen scaling?

Shawn

MASSIVE update tonight. Jim has maintained on the beta user forum a list of implemented features as well as a to-do list, and I got his blessing to reproduce it here. Thanks Jim!

Also, a minor correction to obtaining access to said forums (I removed references to the NDA, since it doesn't apply anymore).

Enjoy!

I tend to agree with you on HDMI 1.3, but we seem to be in the minority. I have dropped the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXS, and pushing forward on the HDMI 1.3 RadianceXD. Later we will add a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS to the lineup.


In the meantime, virtual input would allow me to place the Radiance behind the Preamp. It would be OK to use the existing 6 HDMI inputs that could be re-assigned to another shared HDMI input. Even simpler. Make it so 2-5 can be assigned to 1. This way you do not have to worry about loops ;)

Is this a possibility?

- Rich

A quick question for you guys.. I have a CIH setup with VPL-VW60. The projector has 2.35:1 support internally. I have ordered the RadianceXD beta and I'm anxiously waiting for the delivery, which is sometime this week.

Currently the Anamorphic Zoom available in VPL-VW60 is stretching the HD content more than it should. When I watch Football, the top line that has the score is not visible. Though there are other modes that can do the job (fill the screen without too much vertical scaling), they are not as good as the Anamorphic Zoom.

Would RadianceXD differentiate between a 16:9 HD content vs an anamorphic movie stored as 16:9 with black bars above & below. Are there settings that are available in the unit to specify this. Appreciate your feedbackAutomatic aspect ratio detection is planned as a post-release feature - it will only work with hdmi inputs though.

Jeff:

Please make sure to report any bugs to us at support@lumagen.com, or use the Beta forum.

Thanks.

Right now I have a hold up in my theater so my theater is still down... I am hoping to get it up this weekend or next week. Thanks!

Does Non-linear-Stretch (NLS) for 4:3 sources on a 16:9 screens mean that a 4:3 AR will be stretched to fit the 16:9 screen, and the same for 16:9 to 2.35?

Does Non-linear-Stretch (NLS) for 4:3 sources on a 16:9 screens mean that a 4:3 AR will be stretched to fit the 16:9 screen, and the same for 16:9 to 2.35?

Yes, although these are two separate pieces of functionality. Look at the list of features that's planned post-release.

"On the Radiance second simultaneous output resolution: We are considering this for the RadiancePro, but the FPGA in the RadianceXD is not big enough."

What about if the second output used the Gennum scaling instead of Lumagen scaling?

Shawn

The problem comes with aspect ratio control, cropping, etc. We do all this in our FPGA using our scaling engine so we keep our "no-ring" scaling in play.

One possibility we have considered that might work is that, if the primary output is 1080p, we could do 1080i video on the second HDMI output. We would require that both have the same display aspect ratio.

Does this make sense to have the secondary output at 1080i for this specific case? It would give you something that worked with older HD displays.

Definitely a post-production enhancement if we did this.

In the meantime, virtual input would allow me to place the Radiance behind the Preamp. It would be OK to use the existing 6 HDMI inputs that could be re-assigned to another shared HDMI input. Even simpler. Make it so 2-5 can be assigned to 1. This way you do not have to worry about loops ;)

Is this a possibility?

- Rich

Certainly possible. I will talk it over with Patrick.

Another "post-production" release feature if we were to do this.

Jim: Does the addition of calibration tools to your lower level VPs mean that the calibration box you were considering for the new year is now unlikely?

Jim: Does the addition of calibration tools to your lower level VPs mean that the calibration box you were considering for the new year is now unlikely?Gee, I sure hope not. That is a product that I have been salivating for. I would recommend it to virtually all of my clients and at a reasonable price point a lot would go for it.

A sub-$1K calibration-only box would be a HUGE seller.

Gee, I sure hope not. That is a product that I have been salivating for. I would recommend it to virtually all of my clients and at a reasonable price point a lot would go for it.

A sub-$1K calibration-only box would be a HUGE seller.

Agreed particularly given Sean's latest encouraging results in the RS1 gamut thread and similar issues with other projectors.

Minor update to Thursday night's massive update; added game modes to list of to-be-implemented-post-release features.

I know that 48p output (given a 24p input, and eventually, an interlaced input), is coming as a feature soon. Will that 48p be just a field doubling, ie. repeating fields from the 24p, or will it be 48 unique interpolated fields? If the latter, that would *really* smooth out motion!

I don't give a damn about HDMI 1.3.
I definitely do. Not because of the audio stuff but because I really want the flexibility to send 10 or 12 bit data for YUV and RGB to the display of my choice after the Radiance performed a series of complex processing steps where rounding and dithering are important issues. MY current display may or may not have HDMI1.3 right now. But it sure will in 1-2 years. And my Radiance should be able to keep up with display progress for the next couple of years. I expect to change displays more often than my video processor.

In the meantime, virtual input would allow me to place the Radiance behind the Preamp. It would be OK to use the existing 6 HDMI inputs that could be re-assigned to another shared HDMI input. Even simpler. Make it so 2-5 can be assigned to 1. This way you do not have to worry about loops ;)

Is this a possibility?

- RichCertainly possible. I will talk it over with Patrick.

Another "post-production" release feature if we were to do this.

Is it possible to make it transparent to the user ?

Can the HDMI source be identified by the VP and automatically assigned to a virtual HDMI input ?

This would allow the user to just map each HDMI source to a virtual HDMI input.

May be an unknow source would be also allowed for a non HDMI source signal (an analog source up-converted to HDMI by the receiver for example). The unknown source would then be automatically assigned to a specific virtual HDMI input.

This way, HDMI 1.3 would be unnecessary on the VP for audio as well as 6 hardware HDMI inputs (may be 3 or 4 would be sufficient if we have 6 virtual assignable HDMI inputs).

My understanding is that HDMI 1.3 on the video front for a VP will be unnecessary as long as the scaler don't take care of such signals...

What HDMI 1.3 means for the VP50 Pro on the video front ? Is it able to take an HDMI 1.1 signal and make some color "scaling" to expand it to a wide color HDMI 1.3 signal ? Or can it take a HDMI 1.3 wide color signal to make a "state of the art" color range down-scaling to send to an HDMI 1.1 display ?

Even with actual HDMI 1.3 source and HDMI 1.3 display, We have a better image using an actual VPs than connecting directly the source to the display with this "extended" color mode ON on each part (since no source is encoded that way).

If think that HDMI 1.3 display will firstly be interesting when VPs will be able to take care of such signals. And "far" later when sources will be encoded that way.

Am I right or did I missed something ?

Richard.

Has anyone ever compared the PQ of, say, a dvdo VP30 against its Lumagen counterpart?

Does the Lumagen do HD processing instead of just passing it?

Is a replacement of the outdated dvi sockets planned?

Has anyone ever compared the PQ of, say, a dvdo VP30 against its Lumagen counterpart?

Does the Lumagen do HD processing instead of just passing it?

Is a replacement of the outdated dvi sockets planned?

Click click. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=909924)

I definitely do. Not because of the audio stuff but because I really want the flexibility to send 10 or 12 bit data for YUV and RGB to the display of my choice after the Radiance performed a series of complex processing steps where rounding and dithering are important issues. MY current display may or may not have HDMI1.3 right now. But it sure will in 1-2 years. And my Radiance should be able to keep up with display progress for the next couple of years. I expect to change displays more often than my video processor.

100% agreed. For the first time I can see keeping a vp for more than a year or two. The Radiance leaves little to be desired. Projectors will come and go but this will remain a contant in my setup for sometime I think. Being as such it should keep up with the inevitable evolution of display and audio components and be HDMI 1.3 capable.

JRP (Jim) - If for no other reason you should have HDMI 1.3 on the XS to quell the whining that you'll hear. In the long run you'll save yourself a lot of grief even if you never take advantage of 1.3 capabilities. Just having it at 1.3 will be the reason that tilts some some to buy.

I have a question re the audio output capabilities. The background to my question is that I use an (old but good) Meridian 563 DAC that can only accept PCM at up to 48kHz.

I assume that the SPDIF output follows the HDMI input in that the output frequency would be controlled by the source machine, ie in my case I would need to select downconverted audio to achieve 2 channel SPDIF at 48kHz?

What about the analogue audio input, I assume that this is goes through a ADC - is this then output at 48kHz / 96kHz / user selectable on the SPDIF output? I would want to have the audio in the digital domain for ease of switching and control of audio delay.

I don't recall this having been discussed elsewhere.

Thanks

John

Blending?

Athanasios

Hope i'm not a pain the arse.

Is it possible to make it transparent to the user ?

Can the HDMI source be identified by the VP and automatically assigned to a virtual HDMI input ?

This would allow the user to just map each HDMI source to a virtual HDMI input.
The EDID information that gets sent over the wire does identify the display, but I'm not sure whether it identifies the source component. If it did, then this would be a great feature for the Radiance DS (downstream ;) ).

Personally, I'd love to see the Radiance DS before the Radiance XS, especially since it could be HDMI 1.1.

Bill

If you can use DVI-D for video (say by having the video processor after the amp), you may be able to get all these features VisionHDP, VisionHDQ or VisionPro HDP. This is because I am considering adding primary gamut controls for these Vision series processors (this is in addition to the 11-point parametric grayscale and color/hue/offsets already implemented for these).

Not a done deal yet, but now that we have it in the Radiance, we know how big the logic is, and believe we can fit it in the (HDP/HDQ/Pro) Vision series FPGA.


I'd have to have a lot of DVI to HDMI connectors :) But for the savings it's not so bad an idea. What's your best "guesstimate" for timeframe in adding this to the HDP/Q/Pro series?

Let's say I decide to buy this processor. How would I calibrate the color? My last projector was calibrated by William Phelps. Does one assume that I'd have to send it to Phelps for calibration/color correction?

Raoul-Sam

Let's say I decide to buy this processor. How would I calibrate the color? My last projector was calibrated by William Phelps. Does one assume that I'd have to send it to Phelps for calibration/color correction?No, any reasonably competent ISF calibrator can do it.

Let's say I decide to buy this processor. How would I calibrate the color? My last projector was calibrated by William Phelps. Does one assume that I'd have to send it to Phelps for calibration/color correction?

Raoul-Sam

Raoul:

As it relates to Tom comment that "any reasonably competent ISF calibrator can do it" more than includes Tom...meaning, that you will not be disappointed as he did a great job for me.

As an added bonus he also helped me learn enough to be able to do it -- maybe not as well -- myself.

HTH

No, any reasonably competent ISF calibrator can do it.

Have you actually seen many people's work? I have and I would not claim that to be true.

Jim: Does the addition of calibration tools to your lower level VPs mean that the calibration box you were considering for the new year is now unlikely?

It's no more unlikely, but we have not committed to a calibration box at this time.

With color-gamut, etc, the VisionHDP at $1199 seems a great value to me, and not too much to pay even if you just needed the calibration features. I'm biased of course.

Can the HDMI source be identified by the VP and automatically assigned to a virtual HDMI input ? ...

Richard.

I don't think this can be selected automatically by the Radiance - other than if they were at different resolutions, then the input sub-resolution memories could detect the difference.

...Does the Lumagen do HD processing instead of just passing it?

Is a replacement of the outdated dvi sockets planned?

Do you mean about the Vision series? If so, then yes, the VisionHDP, et.al, series all have per-pixel 1080i processing, and all but the VisionDVI have 1080i inverse telecine.

We have discussed a Vision follow on with HDMI, but have not made any plans for this.

I'd have to have a lot of DVI to HDMI connectors :) But for the savings it's not so bad an idea. What's your best "guesstimate" for timeframe in adding this to the HDP/Q/Pro series?

I believe we are two to three months out for color-gamut in the VisionHDP series, but that will depend on the progress with the RadianceXD software.

Just my opinion but the fact taht Lumagenis going to add both color gamut and color decoding calibration capabilities to the VisionHDP/HDPPro/HDQ is surely a reason to be a loyal customer...look at the value the original owners of theses unit will get over their unit's lifetime...it is amazing...I should be so lucky to get this kind of value elsewhere...

Jim, you keep building and I will, subject to fund availability, keep buying!

Updated the FAQ on non-US prices - I suppose I toned down the content on that one.

I received a private message from an overseas dealer who pointed out that it's not exactly greed that motivates the higher non-US prices (well, not just greed anyway - they've got to make a living too :)). Long story short: it's complicated.

With color-gamut, etc, the VisionHDP at $1199 seems a great value to me, and not too much to pay even if you just needed the calibration features. I'm biased of course.At that price, it's a complete steal. VisionHD customers have already had their expectations surpassed. Adding gamut is simply ludicrous! :eek::D:)

No, any reasonably competent ISF calibrator can do it.

It isn't that difficult to do it yourself if you are technically inclined. All you need is an Eye-One Pro, the right software and a basic understanding of how the adjustments work.

I'm not ISF trained, but I've calibrated mine using Calman V3. It contains step by step how-to files from setting black and white levels, adjusting greyscale, colour gamut through to the colour decoder options that are present in the Radiance.

Tim

I tend to agree with you on HDMI 1.3, but we seem to be in the minority. I have dropped the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXS, and pushing forward on the HDMI 1.3 RadianceXD. Later we will add a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS to the lineup.

If you can use DVI-D for video (say by having the video processor after the amp), you may be able to get all these features VisionHDP, VisionHDQ or VisionPro HDP. This is because I am considering adding primary gamut controls for these Vision series processors (this is in addition to the 11-point parametric grayscale and color/hue/offsets already implemented for these).

Not a done deal yet, but now that we have it in the Radiance, we know how big the logic is, and believe we can fit it in the (HDP/HDQ/Pro) Vision series FPGA.

On the Radiance second simultaneous output resolution: We are considering this for the RadiancePro, but the FPGA in the RadianceXD is not big enough. However, you can use a second memory and temporarily change the output resolution so you can view the image using the other HDMI output driving a monitor to avoid turning on your projector. Then just reselect the primary configuration memory when you turn your projector on.

It isn't that difficult to do it yourself if you are technically inclined. All you need is an Eye-One Pro, the right software and a basic understanding of how the adjustments work.

I'm not ISF trained, but I've calibrated mine using Calman V3. It contains step by step how-to files from setting black and white levels, adjusting greyscale, colour gamut through to the colour decoder options that are present in the Radiance.

Tim

Do any of the calibration programs have drivers to adjust the video processors automagically?

I tend to agree with you on HDMI 1.3, but we seem to be in the minority. I have dropped the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXS, and pushing forward on the HDMI 1.3 RadianceXD. Later we will add a HDMI 1.3 RadianceXS to the lineup...

Can you give your best guess on when a RadianceXS might make an appearance?

At that price, it's a complete steal. VisionHD customers have already had their expectations surpassed. Adding gamut is simply ludicrous! :eek::D:)

Yeah. It looks like Lumagen's worst competitor is itself. :)

Seriously though, that is incredibly classy of Lumagen to do this. I've never seen that level of continuous support anywhere else, ever. Just amazing.

Assuming this trend continues, just imagine what the XD will do a few years from now...

Can you give your best guess on when a RadianceXS might make an appearance?

Keep in mind the following;
- Jim has repeatedly stated that there is no time line for the XS as of now (that he will publicly discuss anyway)
- chances are the HDMI 1.3 upgrade for the XD will come out way before the XS, and there's currently no time line for the 1.3 upgrade either
- the XD's not even out yet

So - and take the following for what it's worth, e.g., not much - I wouldn't expect a Radiance XS before the second half of 2008 at the very earliest.

Now - the counter argument would be that all the kinks in making an hdmi/gennum based vp have been ironed out with the XD, and making the XS will be a much simpler, much shorter process. Even so, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Thanks - I was anticipating end of '08. I better cross my fingers instead of holding my breath.

Do any of the calibration programs have drivers to adjust the video processors automagically?


Raoul:

Two points on this:

- Calibration is part science and part art and, as suc, manual intervention would still be required...the best analogy that I can think of is calbrating one's audio system when after the AUTO EQ has done its thing one nest goes in and tweaks things.

- It is my understanding that CalMAN V 3.0 will have this capability somewhere down the line...when exactly I do not know. I do not know what other calibration software vendors are planning.

HTH

Joel

I just purchased the Sony Black Pearl projector (VPL-VW60) and I am interested in purchasing the RadianceXD video processor. Please let me know where I can buy one.
Are any of the AVS forum vendors selling them?
Thanks.

Tom

I just purchased the Sony Black Pearl projector (VPL-VW60) and I am interested in purchasing the RadianceXD video processor. Please let me know where I can buy one.
Are any of the AVS forum vendors selling them?
Thanks.

Tom

AV Science (this very forum's owners) sell them. See avscience.com. Their contact page is a bit out of date though, as Jason doesn't do sales anymore, but Richard does. Or you can call them directly.

If you want to buy from a dealer near you need to contact Lumagen for a list.

1. How far off are these Radiance units from going into official release? (They are still in testing phase aren't they?)

2. Is the Radiance Pro version still coming? eta after above is released? What will it offer over the standard vp? HD-SDI input?

3. Are these HDMI 1.3? If not, will there be an upgrade path for 1.3 support? How would that work?

4. Does the radiance handle passthrough of TrueHD and DTS-HD etc?? PCM? How many channels?

I've been a serial dvdo upgrader, but looking at the great support here, I'd like to avoid upgrading to the vp50pro and make the switch to lumagen :) TIA!

Gino, have a look at this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=909924)- it answers all your questions I think.

Gino, have a look at this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=909924)- it answers all your questions I think.

wow, great thread. even answered questions i didn't think of earlier :)

i'm going to try and hold off for another 3 months, and if no announcement of the RadiancePro, I'll grab the VP50Pro to tide me over until it's finally released. :o

It is my understanding that CalMAN V 3.0 will have this capability somewhere down the line...when exactly I do not know. I do not know what other calibration software vendors are planning.
Our first step towards creating "automagic" is to sit patiently for Jim and team to add-in the RS232 controls we need to do anything. After that, we should have basic test pattern control pretty quickly after ordinary serial control is released, and anything else beyond that will, I am guessing, be based on what we can convince Jim we can do and what users can convince Jim is something that adds value to the processor.

The turnaround time for when we initially asked for pattern control in the HDP/HDQ series was quite fast, so this is really an issue of prioritization, I'm sure. And as a reminder, yes, we do have pattern control for the HDP/HDQ series already in place and working in v3.

Bill

How about a system where you plug the eye into the PJ / Radiance and hit a button and it is calibrated? No test patterns to scroll through, no work...just plug it in, go get a bear, come back to the theater and you are ideally calibrated...:D

Ohh....Any word on 1080P24sf for the Radiance?

...just plug it in, go get a bear, come back to the theater and you are ideally calibrated...:D

That takes way to long. Even longer if it's not bear hunting season. Besides that, bear hunting usually has an extremely low WAF. :p

Ohh....Any word on 1080P24sf for the Radiance?

All implemented, upcoming pre and post release features are addressed in the FAQ (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=909924), including this one (pre-release, so sometime in December).

How about a system where you plug the eye into the PJ / Radiance and hit a button and it is calibrated? No test patterns to scroll through, no work...just plug it in, go get a bear, come back to the theater and you are ideally calibrated...:D
Go get a "bear"? ;) My rates tend to be higher than most want to pay and my availability is very low, but yes, you can "just go get a bear", and have it calibrated.

As for getting a beer and having it calibrated, well, that would definitely be automagic.

Bill

I have had a chance to calibrate a couple of displays with the Lumagen and I have some tentative observations to offer:

First, the human interface for the primary gamut adjustment tool requires some work. The biggest problem is that the adjustments are far too granular. Lumagen needs to lower the number of adjustment points and raise the sensitivity of the control so that each tick makes a greater change. For example, you may have to lower one of the controls 30 ticks before you can see ANY change in the color response. Exacerbating the problem is that the adjustment button has to pressed each time to move the control a single click. You can't just press the button and then hold it down to have the adjustment scroll through its available range. In short, the tool works but it is a royal pain in the ass to use.

Second, Lumagen might want to increase the range of adjustment. For example, the JVC RS1's green primary is extremely oversaturated. Even with the Radiance gamut control set to lower the green primary to its maximum amount, green is still somewhat oversaturated, though it is greatly improved, lowering the dE94 from 11.1 to 4.7 (Ideally, you'd like this under 2).

Third, the interface is more complicated than it needs to be. You use the gamut control to lower the saturation of the primaries, but you use the Color/Hue control to adjust the lightness of the primaries and hue of the secondaries. I understand the reasoning behind putting the color decoding controls under a separate menu, but why not just put hue/saturation/lightness controls all in the same place?

Fourth, there seems to be some unwanted interaction between the gamut control and the secondaries. In particular, in both calibrations I ended up with red and blue primaries that were reasonably accurate, but the lightness of magenta was severely reduced. The lightness of magenta should be a direct sum of red and blue, but for some reason it wasn't. Something odd going on there.

Fifth, it would probably be a good idea to at some point add saturation and lightness controls for the secondaries.

Sixth, the current build of the deinterlacer has a problem with 480i HDMI inputs (I didn't test component). It does not pass the full resolution of the DVD specification, which is 6.75mhz. A 6.75mhz multiburst pattern from a DVD source or Accupel signal generator is severely rolled off. I understand that Lumagen is aware of this and is working on it.

Seventh, the 11-point grayscale/gamma control works as advertised and resulted in a nearly perfect gamma curve and grayscale tracking with very little work required.

Tom,

did you report these finding to Lumagen? Jim reads this thread, but it would be very useful as direct feedback as well. :)

I have had a chance to calibrate a couple of displays with the Lumagen and I have some tentative observations to offer:

First, the human interface for the primary gamut adjustment tool requires some work. The biggest problem is that the adjustments are far too granular. Lumagen needs to lower the number of adjustment points and raise the sensitivity of the control so that each tick makes a greater change. For example, you may have to lower one of the controls 30 ticks before you can see ANY change in the color response. Exacerbating the problem is that the adjustment button has to pressed each time to move the control a single click. You can't just press the button and then hold it down to have the adjustment scroll through its available range. In short, the tool works but it is a royal pain in the ass to use.

Second, Lumagen might want to increase the range of adjustment. For example, the JVC RS1's green primary is extremely oversaturated. Even with the Radiance gamut control set to lower the green primary to its maximum amount, green is still somewhat oversaturated, though it is greatly improved, lowering the dE94 from 11.1 to 4.7 (Ideally, you'd like this under 2).

Third, the interface is more complicated than it needs to be. You use the gamut control to lower the saturation of the primaries, but you use the Color/Hue control to adjust the lightness of the primaries and hue of the secondaries. I understand the reasoning behind putting the color decoding controls under a separate menu, but why not just put hue/saturation/lightness controls all in the same place?

Fourth, there seems to be some unwanted interaction between the gamut control and the secondaries. In particular, in both calibrations I ended up with red and blue primaries that were reasonably accurate, but the lightness of magenta was severely reduced. The lightness of magenta should be a direct sum of red and blue, but for some reason it wasn't. Something odd going on there.

Fifth, it would probably be a good idea to at some point add saturation and lightness controls for the secondaries.

Sixth, the current build of the deinterlacer has a problem with 480i HDMI inputs (I didn't test component). It does not pass the full resolution of the DVD specification, which is 6.75mhz. A 6.75mhz multiburst pattern from a DVD source or Accupel signal generator is severely rolled off. I understand that Lumagen is aware of this and is working on it.

Seventh, the 11-point grayscale/gamma control works as advertised and resulted in a nearly perfect gamma curve and grayscale tracking with very little work required.

"Exacerbating the problem is that the adjustment button has to pressed each time to move the control a single click. You can't just press the button and then hold it down to have the adjustment scroll through its available range."

Were you using the factory remote or a universal remote? Factory remote certainly scrolls the control as will universal remotes if they are programmed to do so. I do agree that it would be nice if the scrolling were faster though.

Shawn

"Exacerbating the problem is that the adjustment button has to pressed each time to move the control a single click. You can't just press the button and then hold it down to have the adjustment scroll through its available range."

Were you using the factory remote or a universal remote? Factory remote certainly scrolls the control as will universal remotes if they are programmed to do so. I do agree that it would be nice if the scrolling were faster though.You know, this is sort of comical. In both instances, the customer controlled the remote and in BOTH cases I think he used a universal. They both complained of the inability to scroll. So this apparently isn't the Lumagen's fault.

thebland,

I discussed this quite a few times with Lumagen. The problem is that this would kill the unit's value with the custom installer market, which is the market where Lumagen is making most of its money these days.

Add to that the fact that the best place to do calibration is the screen or projector. People would be tempted to calibrate everything through the processor, a completely wrong approach.

The right approach is to calibrate the display first, and then use the processor to remove errors originating from the display's error.

You don't want to have a digital player playing audio in very low volumes and then amplify it using a monster amp, right? Same goes here, you want the processor to correct any mistakes that the display itself might be unable to correct.

BTW, amazing stuff you guys are doing here. I'm envious, still with my trusty ol' HDPPro.

...
People would be tempted to calibrate everything through the processor, a completely wrong approach.

The right approach is to calibrate the display first, and then use the processor to remove errors originating from the display's error.


Since all these operations are done on the digital video signal, where is the problem doing it in a VP instead of in the display ?

I think that you need first to set all the display settings to default but I don't see why a setting will be better set on the display than on the VP ?


You don't want to have a digital player playing audio in very low volumes and then amplify it using a monster amp, right? Same goes here, you want the processor to correct any mistakes that the display itself might be unable to correct.


I don't think color calibration done on a digital video signal and amplifying the sound on an amp are comparable.

Amplifying is done after all digital audio operations.

For me, amplification on an amp is comparable to optical zoom on a projector and color calibration is comparable to digital sound processing (sound equalizer or DSP operations wich may be done in a Pre Amp).

Am I wrong ?

Richard.

Tom: The units are still in beta so this is good feedback and Jim is aware of all the things you mention. It's a work in progress and I think he is already considering adding the secondary controls you talk about. Even as it stands though from the work I've done with it the difference in image quality is pretty significant.

Gordon

Since all these operations are done on the digital video signal, where is the problem doing it in a VP instead of in the display ?

I think that you need first to set all the display settings to default but I don't see why a setting will be better set on the display than on the VP ?
...Am I wrong ?

Richard.



It is going to depend on the situation.

Take sharpness and edge enhancement if the display by default is doing something wrong here the VP cannot fix it and the opposite is also true. Both devices need to be setup correctly in this department or the image will be compromised.

Iris and lamp controls are going to fall in the display only camp.

When it comes to picture level things get more subtle. Most displays have 10 to 12 bit processing which is very good. The data transmitted between the processor and the display may be 8 bit. When this is the case it is best to do everything possible in the display to avoid loss of resolution. When high bit depth can be transmitted between the two devices and the video processor has enough range of control doing level adjustments in the video processor or display should be the same unless one of them does it better.

The other thing I have found lately is that a display may support 10 and 12 bit inputs, but it may drop the least significant bits once it receives the data. This is probably happening because the data path is 8 bit until the video processor in the display. The same type of thing happened in the early days of DVI. People thought they were getting a digital signal path, but many displays would immediately convert the signal to analog because that was the easiest way to implement the new input types.

I personally trust display controls a little more than video processors and would focus most of my effort there and use the video processor when necessary. One benefit of this is you can see when the video processor is wrong when you have setup the display well and A/B test patterns between the two signal paths. This way you can correct setup problems in the video processor easier. If you don't calibrate the display you may miss the fact that the processor is actually putting out the wrong signal at times.

Thanks a lot !

That's a very detailled answer.

Richard.

Tom:

Thanks for your feedback.

- We are about to do a release that corrects a minor error in the color equations. After this is done, primary adjustment will not change the secondary colors. This is intentional, and allows us to cleanly add a secondary gamut control later.

- The controls do scroll when you hold down the Lumagen remote. I have asked Pat to speed up the scroll speed. We might even step by 2 to speed this up as it does take a long time to get through the entire range.

- We started with twice the primary adjust range I thought a resonable projector would need, and then recently we doubled that. It seems that this is still not enough for the RS-1 and other displays. We will be increasing the range for primary gamut controls again for at least the green channel (the range we have now seems enough for red and blue primary colors).

- About the menu for Gamut being a different place then color/hue: This makes sense to us. We try to limit how many controls are in one menu.

- As you point out, the color level controls (color which affect all three primaries, color red and color green which affect their respective primaries) can be used to reduce color saturation. This can have some unexpected effects since it is done in YCbCr color space rather than RGB. YCbCr color and they are not completely independent for R, G, and B. This interaction is more if Hue is not at it's default setting. So, it should be used with caution. We are looking at adding secondary color gamut control, which would be a better way to do this.

- Several people have asked me about using the Hue, and Hue offset, controls for adjusting the secondaries. I believe Hue, and Hue offsets, should only be used to correct color decoder errors.

[EDIT] I removed comment about Hue control affecting grayscale. I was remembering the eqautions wrong and changing Hue will not affect grayscale.

- On 6.75 MHz passing through the video filters for 480i input: We will add this to the pipeline. We already pass 6.75 MHz in the Lumagen Vision series, and 6.75 MHz does pass through the filters for 480p input already. However, no real video source can have 6.75 MHz, and in fact working to pass this "test pattern only" case (well, menus can have this, so it is not completely useless) can harm real video if not done properly. The 6.75 MHz pattern is at the Niquist frequency. A video filter will not pass this, unless the samples are in-phase. What you will see in any video system that has filtering - such as a video processor - is there will be a roll-off in frequency response that becomes significant below Niquist and then - magic - the Niquist frequency passes (but only because it is in-phase with the samples in that digital system). So, 6.75 MHz does not reflect on the quality of the video filter (frequency response, pass-band ripple, etc.). A good filter may not pass 6.75 MHz, and a bad one might do just fine at 6.75 MHz.

Still, as soon as as get a chance we will look at why 6.75 MHz does not pass through for Radiance 480i inputs.

- We started with twice the primary adjust range I thought a resonable projector would need, and then recently we doubled that. It seems that this is still not enough for the RS-1 and other displays. We will be increasing the range for primary gamut controls again for at least the green channel (the range we have now seems enough for red and blue primary colors).
Hmmmm... How many bits of the 12bit YCbCr 4:2:2 HDMI output are eaten by this much high than expected correction range? Are you still confident that there will be no banding introduced with 12bit YCbCr 4:2:2 HDMI output?

Thanks! :)

I have a question re the audio output capabilities. The background to my question is that I use an (old but good) Meridian 563 DAC that can only accept PCM at up to 48kHz.

I assume that the SPDIF output follows the HDMI input in that the output frequency would be controlled by the source machine, ie in my case I would need to select downconverted audio to achieve 2 channel SPDIF at 48kHz?

What about the analogue audio input, I assume that this is goes through a ADC - is this then output at 48kHz / 96kHz / user selectable on the SPDIF output? I would want to have the audio in the digital domain for ease of switching and control of audio delay.

I don't recall this having been discussed elsewhere.

Thanks

John

jrp,

Can I please ask this once more as I am very interested in the Radiance product and would welcome a better understanding as to the level of flexibility that is offered for the ADC component of the design.

Thanks

John

Jim:

Given this, I think that the need for secondary gamut controls is that much greater. What calibrators need, and what the external processor market simply does not offer, is a way to independently correct the hue, saturation, and lightness of RGBCYM. If, as you suggest, we should not use the color decoding adjustments for primary lightness and secondary hue adjustments, then the Radiance's color management features are limited to primary hue and saturation controls. That leaves a lot on the table.

BTW, this points to a distinction that is easily confusing. Color decoder errors occur when YPbBr signals are incorrectly mapped to RGB. The symptoms of this defect are primary lightness errors (red push) and/or secondary hue errors. However, a display can exhibit those same symptoms even when operating solely in the digital RGB domain where color decoding errors per se cannot occur. Nonetheless, we often loosely refer to these types of errors, regardless of the cause, as color decoding errors.

- As you point out, the color level controls (color which affect all three primaries, color red and color green which affect their respective primaries) can be used to reduce color saturation. This can have some unexpected effects since it is done in YCbCr color space rather than RGB. YCbCr color and they are not completely independent for R, G, and B. This interaction is more if Hue is not at it's default setting. So, it should be used with caution. We are looking at adding secondary color gamut control, which would be a better way to do this.

- Several people have asked me about using the Hue, and Hue offset, controls for adjusting the secondaries. I recommend against this. Hue and hue-offsets, can have the effect of adding color with a "gray" input and creating other artifacts. I believe Hue, and Hue offsets, should only be used to correct color decoder errors.

Hmmmm... How many bits of the 12bit YCbCr 4:2:2 HDMI output are eaten by this much high than expected correction range? Are you still confident that there will be no banding introduced with 12bit YCbCr 4:2:2 HDMI output?

Thanks! :)

Color gamut will not add banding.

Take for example the green primary. The Green channel itself is not changed. Rather, red and blue are increased to make green less "green". So, it can not add banding to the green channel.

This section of the pipeline is 12-bits. The data itself is 10-bits. For adding red to green, we multiply the green channel by the "red" factor number which is a fraction. But the "fraction" is delt with in hardware as an integer, then after the multiply the result is "shifted right" to account for its fractional nature. So, we actually end up with a 12-bit value added to the 10-bit red channel. Note that the 12-bit value essentially has two fraction bits. Same for blue.

So, the dominant channel (green in this case) has not changed at all. The other two channels are changing with a resolution of two bits more than the data. So, this stage will not add banding to the image.

jrp,

Can I please ask this once more as I am very interested in the Radiance product and would welcome a better understanding as to the level of flexibility that is offered for the ADC component of the design.

Thanks

John

If you use "user EDID" for audio, you can keep the HDMI input audio reporting to only allow up to 48 KHz.

The digital spdif inputs just pass what they are sent.

The analog input is, at this point, sampling at 96 KHz and so the SPDIF out is 96 KHz. We do not at this time plan to change this to be programmable. Might be something we could tackle later.

So, using your current DAC would be an issue for analog in, but would be okay for HDMI in using the "User EDID" option, and if your SPDIF sources work now they would continue to work through the RadianceXD.

Jim:

1) Given this, I think that the need for secondary gamut controls is that much greater. ...

2) BTW, this points to a distinction that is easily confusing. Color decoder errors occur when YPbBr signals are incorrectly mapped to RGB. The symptoms of this defect are primary lightness errors (red push) and/or secondary hue errors. However, a display can exhibit those same symptoms even when operating solely in the digital RGB domain where color decoding errors per se cannot occur. Nonetheless, we often loosely refer to these types of errors, regardless of the cause, as color decoding errors.

1) I agree. I am thinking secondary control will go in to the RadianceXD after Production release, but I am not at the point to firmly commit just yet.

2) In a pure RGB system, such as an older CRT projector, I understand why these errors might be called "color decoder" errors. However, I think they would be better referred to as color gamut errors. I tend to refer to "color decoder" errors only in reference to color space conversion errors. Certainly, a system may have both of these and have them get lumped together and called color decoder errors.

Color gamut will not add banding.

Take for example the green primary. The Green channel itself is not changed. Rather, red and blue are increased to make green less "green". So, it can not add banding to the green channel.

This section of the pipeline is 12-bits. The data itself is 10-bits. For adding red to green, we multiply the green channel by the "red" factor number which is a fraction. But the "fraction" is delt with in hardware as an integer, then after the multiply the result is "shifted right" to account for its fractional nature. So, we actually end up with a 12-bit value added to the 10-bit red channel. Note that the 12-bit value essentially has two fraction bits. Same for blue.

So, the dominant channel (green in this case) has not changed at all. The other two channels are changing with a resolution of two bits more than the data. So, this stage will not add banding to the image.
Thank you, sounds good to me!

To support Jim from a user's viewpoint, I have been using my Radiance to correct the color gamut for my C3X through several firmware revisions, and I have noticed absolutely no banding due to the Radiance at all. And, I have been looking for it.

Bob

To support Jim from a user's viewpoint, I have been using my Radiance to correct the color gamut for my C3X through several firmware revisions, and I have noticed absolutely no banding due to the Radiance at all. And, I have been looking for it.

Bob

Ditto, and that is even using 8bit RGB output.

Shawn

To support Jim from a user's viewpoint, I have been using my Radiance to correct the color gamut for my C3X through several firmware revisions, and I have noticed absolutely no banding due to the Radiance at all. And, I have been looking for it.I've used it on a couple of displays and I saw no banding.

Of course with a video processor the discussion tends toward video, however, on the audio side... will there be a "smart volume control" to balance across all of those inputs or any one single input?

For example, anyone listening to the OTA of TNTHD will know how bad everything can get. They pump HD content they produce, but the commercials are a mix of their own (national) and local. I can tell you that most of the local content is just barely HD (if at all) and the volume is always totally out of control - it SHOUTS at you.

Having a sound preprocessor that takes sharp, constant, loundness out would be great - note this is not the same as turning down "Ride of the Valkirye" in Apocalypse Now.

Of course with a video processor the discussion tends toward video, however, on the audio side... will there be a "smart volume control" to balance across all of those inputs or any one single input?

For example, anyone listening to the OTA of TNTHD will know how bad everything can get. They pump HD content they produce, but the commercials are a mix of their own (national) and local. I can tell you that most of the local content is just barely HD (if at all) and the volume is always totally out of control - it SHOUTS at you.

Having a sound preprocessor that takes sharp, constant, loundness out would be great - note this is not the same as turning down "Ride of the Valkirye" in Apocalypse Now.

I just suggested a volume trim feature to Jim on the beta forum, and he put it on the 'future functionality' list, but only for the analog stereo inputs. Not sure that solves your issue.

I just suggested a volume trim feature to Jim on the beta forum, and he put it on the 'future functionality' list, but only for the analog stereo inputs. Not sure that solves your issue.

I doubt it. One big culprit is Dolby Digital Dialog Normalization. Once you set the volume a commercial comes in that is not DD or with a different value and you are blown away. Also, there is a complete lack of uniformity between channels. I wish to god I could disable this supposed feature. It is a complete disaster. For example, switching between 2 football games one channel is -7, the other is +4. That is an 11 DB spread!

While I think Lumagen can fix many things, this is not one of them ;)

- Rich

The (Gennum) image enhancement controls are scheduled for the feature release after that. Should have these in by the end of November.

Jim: Do you have a new target date for these enhancements?

Thanks
Ron

Jim: Do you have a new target date for these enhancements?

Thanks
Ron

They will be in the next feature release. We have been in bug-fix mode for langer than expected. We are fixing some HDCP and audio stuff. We also have a color equation fixup in the works.

I expect the image enhancement controls in about two weeks.

I spent more time thinking about using Color and Hue to correct secondaries after the primaries have been calibrated.

I looked at the Hue equations and I was incorrect about grayscale being affected by adjusting Hue. I remembered the equations wrong and looking at them again, it is apparent "Hue" does not affect grayscale.

So, I need to back off a bit and say, while I think adjusting secondaries in RGB space is preferred, some limited adjustment in YCbCr color-space using Color and Hue to adjust secondaries could provide reasonable results.

Sorry for any confusion my comments may have caused.

jrp,

Can I please ask this once more as I am very interested in the Radiance product and would welcome a better understanding as to the level of flexibility that is offered for the ADC component of the design.

Thanks

John

Our analog stereo ADC provides basic 2-channel stereo audio input support. We use a Cirrus Logic ADC which is well regarded. We sample at 96 KHz at this point. No DSP processing is provided. We have worked hard to design the analog power supplies to provide a high-quality digital version of the analog stereo inputs. We don't have the equipment to measure signal-to-noise or distortion at this point, but we might hire this done at some point.

It's been requested that we add a volume control for the stereo ADC. This is possible, and I am adding it to the todo list. This would be on a per-stereo-input basis.

Hi Jim. Can you give a rough idea how long the Radiance will upgraded to 1.3. ie weeks, months etc. and if it will be a return to base upgrade. I ask because I live in the UK and I want to avoid any extra shipping to and forth.

Hi Jim. Can you give a rough idea how long the Radiance will upgraded to 1.3. ie weeks, months etc. and if it will be a return to base upgrade. I ask because I live in the UK and I want to avoid any extra shipping to and forth.

Me too ! Same condition, but in Italy ;)

OO8: Any upgrade to 1.3 would be carried out in UK, of that I am confident. If you are near my location or are willing to wait till I am nearby it is also quite possible it would be done in your own home.

OO8: Any upgrade to 1.3 would be carried out in UK, of that I am confident. If you are near my location or are willing to wait till I am nearby it is also quite possible it would be done in your own home.


Thanks Gordon that helps.

OK the FAQ says that this is the month for 1080P24sf! Now that I am up and running ,I am looking forward to this res as 540P is my max for now.:(

Can you Lumagen folks give a closer time frame.

The HDMI switching is great and the HDCP issues are well under control. My whole set up was predicated on the switching part with HDMi being seamless and so far, so good!

Jeff, as Jim has explained in the main thread, Lumagen has been in 'bug fix mode' for a little longer than expected these past few weeks. Next firmware releases should deliver some new features. I'll update the FAQ as soon as this happens.

Hi Jim. Can you give a rough idea how long the Radiance will upgraded to 1.3. ie weeks, months etc. and if it will be a return to base upgrade. ...

As Gordon mentioned he can do the upgrade. However, I am actually thinking we may make the HDMI 1.3 "upgrade" more of a trade-in, rather than an upgrade. The main board that needs to be swapped out for 1.3 is the most expensive piece of the RadianceXD. I think there would be enough of a used market for the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXD units that the "upgrade" will be less expensive if we take the HDMI 1.1 unit in trade and resell it. That way the trade-in has residual value to partially offset the cost of the upgrade. This may vary from country to country though.

I still don't have the timing or pricing of the "upgrade" to HDMI 1.3.

Thanks for this update.

I spent more time thinking about using Color and Hue to correct secondaries after the primaries have been calibrated.

I looked at the Hue equations and I was incorrect about grayscale being affected by adjusting Hue. I remembered the equations wrong and looking at them again, it is apparent "Hue" does not affect grayscale.

So, I need to back off a bit and say, while I think adjusting secondaries in RGB space is preferred, some limited adjustment in YCbCr color-space using Color and Hue to adjust secondaries could provide reasonable results.

Sorry for any confusion my comments may have caused.

...
I still don't have the timing or pricing of the "upgrade" to HDMI 1.3.

Yeah, consider people like me that still didn't own any Radiance XD and wait to see a unit just with hdmi 1.3 out of the box from factory ;)

I am actually thinking we may make the HDMI 1.3 "upgrade" more of a trade-in, rather than an upgrade.

As an XD owner, I would like to vote for an option that does not involve sending a unit in, and waiting for a unit to come back, and thus being without for any significant period of time. Buying a board and swapping it myself is ideal, taking it to a dealer/service center for same day swapout or service is next best.

Hello guys,

it seems that the HDPro can do 1080P 72 Hz,

is this still possible with the Radiance ?


Michael

As Gordon mentioned he can do the upgrade. However, I am actually thinking we may make the HDMI 1.3 "upgrade" more of a trade-in, rather than an upgrade. The main board that needs to be swapped out for 1.3 is the most expensive piece of the RadianceXD. I think there would be enough of a used market for the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXD units that the "upgrade" will be less expensive if we take the HDMI 1.1 unit in trade and resell it. That way the trade-in has residual value to partially offset the cost of the upgrade. This may vary from country to country though.

I still don't have the timing or pricing of the "upgrade" to HDMI 1.3.
That's a bit disappointing. I thought that I had read somewhere that the I/O board was a piggy back plug-in type and separated from the main board which I thought carried all of the VP circuitry.

I'm not at all sure that there is a market for the old HDMI 1.1 boards - market push will dictate 1.3 IMHO. Making the change over to HDMI 1.3 a major excercise/cost I think may hold back the market penetration of the current HDMI 1.1 XD.

That's a bit disappointing. I thought that I had read somewhere that the I/O board was a piggy back plug-in type and separated from the main board which I thought carried all of the VP circuitry.

I'm not at all sure that there is a market for the old HDMI 1.1 boards - market push will dictate 1.3 IMHO. Making the change over to HDMI 1.3 a major excercise/cost I think may hold back the market penetration of the current HDMI 1.1 XD.


Or you could simply buy one and use it, upgrade it to 1.3 when needed and forget about the 'what ifs' in life.....:)

Or you could simply buy one and use it, upgrade it to 1.3 when needed and forget about the 'what ifs' in life.....:)Which is exactly what I'm doing ;). Still waiting and waiting for one with a Black faceplate though.......

As an XD owner, I would like to vote for an option that does not involve sending a unit in, and waiting for a unit to come back, and thus being without for any significant period of time. Buying a board and swapping it myself is ideal, taking it to a dealer/service center for same day swapout or service is next best.

I would say shipping a new unit to me, and letting me put my old unit in that same box and ship it back would be more ideal than anything.

I would say shipping a new unit to me, and letting me put my old unit in that same box and ship it back would be more ideal than anything.

Good idea, I would go for that too.

I would say shipping a new unit to me, and letting me put my old unit in that same box and ship it back would be more ideal than anything.Yes, that would be great. I would also expect them to charge me for the new unit and then credit me for my unit upon return, and I would certainly agree with this arrangement.

Bob

I would say shipping a new unit to me, and letting me put my old unit in that same box and ship it back would be more ideal than anything.

I could do either, but if there was a unit swap, then I would not mind if it were guaranteed with a credit card.

- Rich

Hello guys,

it seems that the HDPro can do 1080P 72 Hz,

is this still possible with the Radiance ?


Michael


The VisionHDP Pro can do 1080p72, but it does so at a reduced horizontal resolution. This is more applicable to CRT projectors.

The Radiance should be able to do 1080p72 at a reduced horizontal resolution when we get the pixel level timing functions completed. I am not sure how much this feature will get used though, except when using an external DAC to drive a CRT projector.

... if there was a unit swap, then I would not mind if it were guaranteed with a credit card.

- Rich

In the U.S. we can do the swap as Rich suggests. We would charge the credit card for the difference, send out the new unit and reserve against the balance on the CC in case the old unit does not return in a timely fashion.

Not sure how it will be handled in other countries, but I expect they may be willing to run the program in the same way.

You make it sound like the 1.3 upgrade pricing is going to be painful. Which is unfair since everyone wants to know what it is going to cost and when it is going to arrive and you likely aren't in a position to discuss it, but that's how it sounds :)

My concern would be that the pricing will make it less of an upgrade and more of a buy a new unit and sell your old one to recoup the cost - similar to the upgrade program for existing Vision customers.

As Gordon mentioned he can do the upgrade. However, I am actually thinking we may make the HDMI 1.3 "upgrade" more of a trade-in, rather than an upgrade. The main board that needs to be swapped out for 1.3 is the most expensive piece of the RadianceXD. I think there would be enough of a used market for the HDMI 1.1 RadianceXD units that the "upgrade" will be less expensive if we take the HDMI 1.1 unit in trade and resell it. That way the trade-in has residual value to partially offset the cost of the upgrade. This may vary from country to country though.

I still don't have the timing or pricing of the "upgrade" to HDMI 1.3.

You make it sound like the 1.3 upgrade pricing is going to be painful. Which is unfair since everyone wants to know what it is going to cost and when it is going to arrive and you likely aren't in a position to discuss it, but that's how it sounds :)

My concern would be that the pricing will make it less of an upgrade and more of a buy a new unit and sell your old one to recoup the cost - similar to the upgrade program for existing Vision customers.This is exactly what I was referring to indirectly earlier. One of the reasons for choosing the XD (for me at least), was that it was designed to be an upgradable machine, allowing the I/O and video processing functions to be upgraded independantly.

It's beginning to sound like going to HDMI 1.3 is not going to be just a low cost (say $200) upgrade. It's sounding more like an upgrade to a new processor. If a new motherboard (main board) has to be designed to acommodate HDMI 1.3, it looks to me that we may as well go all the way and add in HD-SDI and RGBHV analog output while we're at it and make it the XD-Pro.

Edit:
Just thinking about this a bit more, I guess the new MB could be designed to acommodate the componentry for the Pro, but only the components required for the standard XD would be fitted. In any case, the XD wouldn't have the additional holes in the chassis for the extra connectors that a Pro would require, so you would have to send the unit back if you wanted the full Pro upgrade/trade-in. (Unless you were prepared to do the metal work yourself of course, which I for one would be happy to do)

As an XD owner, I would like to vote for an option that does not involve sending a unit in, and waiting for a unit to come back, and thus being without for any significant period of time. Buying a board and swapping it myself is ideal, taking it to a dealer/service center for same day swapout or service is next best.

Seconded...that is, unless the exchange can be handled through the local dealer...the problem with sending a new unit and then returning the odl -- at least in canada -- is double taxation and it is a big problem given that it will be 14% of the price!

Seconded...that is, unless the exchange can be handled through the local dealer...!Yes, the freight an other associated costs would be a killer for us OS guys otherwise.

You make it sound like the 1.3 upgrade pricing is going to be painful. Which is unfair since everyone wants to know what it is going to cost and when it is going to arrive and you likely aren't in a position to discuss it, but that's how it sounds :)

My concern would be that the pricing will make it less of an upgrade and more of a buy a new unit and sell your old one to recoup the cost - similar to the upgrade program for existing Vision customers.

I can say it will be a much better deal than the "trade-in program." We are going to trim margin on this. I think there will be a good market for the preowned units, which will allow us to keep the upgrade costs down.

I also think it will be a factory direct upgrade (or for other countries "distributor direct.") to further keep the cost down.

---

As suggested, we have been considering making the first HDMI 1.3 the Pro model so that it includes HD-SDI and BNC analog video. Since we now are thinking trade-in rather than re-fit, this seems to make a lot of sense.

What does everyone think? Would you prefer the HDMI 1.3 in the Pro model at a significant step-up in retail (we would continue selling the RadianceXD as HDMI 1.1 in this case) or a new RadianceXD version and just change to HDMI 1.3 at a more modest retail increase?

In either case, we will do our best to keep the upgrade to the first Radiance HDMI 1.3 model as cost effective as we can for current owners who purchase the RadianceXD before the HDMI 1.3 model is available.

My vote goes with the latter, ie RadianceXD with HDMI 1.3.

I would still like to understand time frames etc and the differential cost in order to make a considered decision. I feel that this 'missing' information will lead to reduced sales of the first RadianceXD as one cannot currently 'price' the cost of receiving a unit early vs just waiting for the 1.3 version. The RadianceXD seems like a great product that will exactly fit my needs, however, like others I don't want to pay 1.5X or whatever the cost is vs waiting a few months for the full-blown version.

John

....
What does everyone think? Would you prefer the HDMI 1.3 in the Pro model at a significant step-up in retail (we would continue selling the RadianceXD as HDMI 1.1 in this case) or a new RadianceXD version and just change to HDMI 1.3 at a more modest retail increase?
......

As a future buyer of Radiance, I would like to see a PRO with Hdmi 1.3 and BNC for SDI on the panel of the unit I'm going to buy :cool:
Would like to see too, for early users, the ability to upgrade to 1.3 on their units, but consider a no sense imho to continue to produce new units with 1.1 connectors/board so this version goes to be discontinued in time ... ;)

What does everyone think? Would you prefer the HDMI 1.3 in the Pro model at a significant step-up in retail (we would continue selling the RadianceXD as HDMI 1.1 in this case) or a new RadianceXD version and just change to HDMI 1.3 at a more modest retail increase?

In either case, we will do our best to keep the upgrade to the first Radiance HDMI 1.3 model as cost effective as we can for current owners who purchase the RadianceXD before the HDMI 1.3 model is available.I bought the Radiance with the understanding that the upgrade to 1.3 would be just that, an upgrade. Having invested a lot already I would be most upset if I was "obliged" to trade up to a more expensive "Pro" model which contained features (SDI and analogue out) that I didn't need. So I would strongly prefer the latter option.

I bought the Radiance with the understanding that the upgrade to 1.3 would be just that, an upgrade. Having invested a lot already I would be most upset if I was "obliged" to trade up to a more expensive "Pro" model which contained features (SDI and analogue out) that I didn't need. So I would strongly prefer the latter option.

Ditto...I would be very disappointed were I forced to go to the Pro model...

I bought the Radiance with the understanding that the upgrade to 1.3 would be just that, an upgrade. Having invested a lot already I would be most upset if I was "obliged" to trade up to a more expensive "Pro" model which contained features (SDI and analogue out) that I didn't need. So I would strongly prefer the latter option.

This is my understanding too. I understand things change, but it shouldn't be a significant change as having to trade up to a new model...that's not how the business model was layed out to us.

I don't even know if I would really want the 1.3 upgrade. I would have to upgrade my 1.1 receiver and buy a new BD(and possibly HD-DVD) player that can output bitstream to take advantage of it. I'd rather just see a BD player come out that can decode DTS-MA and TrueHD, and call it a day.

In my naive opinion, I think a killer app right now would be a little box with HDMI 1.3 in, that could decode the hi-def codecs, and output PCM. Stick that between your player and your Radiance.

I don't know how long that little box would be marketable though, especially if new players start coming out that can do the decoding. But if the manufacturers start relying on HDMI 1.3 and Bitstream out to AVRs that can decode, then I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I'd sure hate to have to go buy another AVR that is trying to be a jack of all trades...

An upgrade to 1.3 for the XD was discussed as part for the feature set, so I too think this should be offered at a modest cost. Long term, the XD should be upgraded to 1.3 to remain viable.

There are already receiver like the Onkyo TX-SR605 (http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR605&p=i&class=Receiver) that can be had for under $400.

- Rich

I don't even know if I would really want the 1.3 upgrade. I would have to upgrade my 1.1 receiver and buy a new BD(and possibly HD-DVD) player that can output bitstream to take advantage of it. I'd rather just see a BD player come out that can decode DTS-MA and TrueHD, and call it a day.

My thoughts exactly. On the other hand, upgradability was one of the reasons I went with the XD. An upgradable 1.1 unit will have better resale value than a "tradable" unit.

An upgradable 1.1 unit will have better resale value than a "tradable" unit.

Excellent point. If I wanted that business model, I might have stayed with the DVDO product (which this last change from VP50 to the VP50 pro)...but the change in models and trade-in program was enough for me. The idea of having a unit that I can upgrade without selling or trading was a huge appeal in going with the Radiance.

Ron

I think you need to introduce the XDPro with HDMI 1.3 and upgrade/trade-in the regular XD to HDMI 1.3.

I would have bought the Pro instead of the XD, but am too impatient and needed a VP now. If offerred, I would upgrade/trade-in my regular XD with HDMI 1.1 for a Pro with HDMI 1.3.