I recently saw the Pearl and Ruby at Magnolia in Seattle. They displayed the Pearl on a 108" Screen Innovation Visage and the Ruby on a 92" Firehawk (not SST, apparently they are waiting for it to come in). After many glowing reviews with respect to the Pearl I was quite dissapointed. I found the picture to be soft and the color reproduction just OK.

The Ruby was the much better projector (and at twice the price, it should be). The color reproduction was significantly better (obviously due to the brigter more expensive xenon bulb) and the picture had much more "pop" too it.

What surprised me most, especially with respect to the Pearl, was how dark the picture was. The Ruby had sufficient light output but in my opinion it would not fare well with some ambient light. The Pearl required complete ambient light control and even with that detail in dark scenes dissapeared. In well lit scenes detail was ok, although the image was somewhat soft. I would assume Magnolia would calibrate the projector at least at a basic level. What I observed was a signiicant loss of detail in dark scenes no matter what user adjustments I or the sales associate tried. If brightness was increased, detail improved somewaht but colors became washed out.

As have many, I have anxiously awaited the release of the JVC RS1. I wonder if it will also be dark. I am really concerned because Tom Stites from JVC, among others, have written that the JVC's picture is quite similar to the Pearl's.

What I am wondering is if this is a shortcoming in D-ILA/SXRD technology. Most DLP projectors I have owned or observed seem to have a much higher light output, even if rated at less Lumens than the Pearl or the Ruby. Does anyone have any comments on this?

On a side note, I am shocked at what reviewers, ie AV Science, have said about the Pearl and question claims that the Pearl achieves 10,000:1 contrast ratios or better.

This experience confirms that in my opinion, no matter how good a product is reviewed, it must be auditined before purchase or be favoured with a very good return policy.

You really cant evaluate these projectors till you know how old the bulb is. Its very possible the Pearl's bulb is old and maybe only putting out 100 lumens. Match that with a lower gain screen (grey) and you are guaranteed to be disappointed.

You need to know more

The Pearl is a great machine if set up properly.

In addition to Tryg's point about bulb age, you also need to know what settings were in play.

The Ruby is rated at 800 lumens, the Pearl 900. They both fall slightly short of that calibrated with a new bulb, but relatively speaking the Pearl is brighter than a Ruby.

The Pearl bulb was only 680 hours old and the Ruby was 360.

With respect to settings we played around with the non-service menu settings at length, adjusting brightness, contrast, sharpness, color etc. at various levels.

No video adjustments made dark scenes with the Pearl satisfying. In normal or bright scenes the Pearl had a very nice picture. But even with no ambient light, dark scene detail could not be achieved. I don't know if any adjustments were made by Magnolia in the service menu. When ambient light was introduced the picture was severely affected.

The Ruby had a beautiful picture, contrast was good, colors were very natural and light output was OK in the light controlled theatre. When ambient light was introduced, the contrast of the Ruby was reduced. With minimal ambient light, just enough to see what you're eating while watching the football game, the Ruby performed well. With normal room lighting, not directed toward the screen, its picture quality fell short of acceptable for that price of projector.

I hope that a previous post, which suggested that projector manafacturers will no longer focus on resolution but will now pay more attention to bulbs, is correct. Perhaps LED projection can address the current technology shortcomings.

What were you feeding the Pearl with? Could be the source was to blame? Wrong ire setting for black or some other detail. Did you compare with another projector there?

The Ruby had a beautiful picture, contrast was good, colors were very natural and light output was OK in the light controlled theatre. When ambient light was introduced, the contrast of the Ruby was reduced. With minimal ambient light, just enough to see what you're eating while watching the football game, the Ruby performed well. With normal room lighting, not directed toward the screen, its picture quality fell short of acceptable for that price of projector.


Judging from that quote it sounds like you liked the Ruby, however, not with "normal room lighting." Projectors in general are not designed for watchng with normal room lighting.

The reason the Pearl was effected more from ambinet light is due to the difference in the 2 screens used.

Originally posted by cpc:
"What were you feeding the Pearl with? Could be the source was to blame. Wrong ire setting for black or some other detail."

The Pearl's source was a Sony DVD player, a Direct TV HD feed and a hard drive containing several movies. The Ruby, had the same hard drive feed, Comcast and a Sony DVD player. The problems I listed above applied to all three sources. I did not check the ire settings for the Sony but assume that Magnolia, in an effort to sell these projectors, had it set up properly. Perhaps someone played around with the settings.

Originally posted by Mit07:
"Projectors in general are not designed for watching with normal room lighting."

Wouldn't it be nice if they were.