Just when I thought LED was the future of projectors...

I want to cry.

I thought LED was the ultimate choice:
1. Cool running with no cool down required or UPS in case of power failure to save a bulb.
2. 20k (?) hour "bulb" life with less than 10% loss in output and no colour shift.
3. 70% energy saving, not to mention less room cooling load.
4. Simple user replaceable LED, if I live that long.
5. "Easy" AR changes.
6. Great contrast ratio and brightness, etc, etc.

I was looking at a Runco, hoping that the price would come down or a used unit would be available by the time I needed it (may be a year from now).

I just read the thread on LED where someone said that LED was hot news 2 years ago at CES and this year it was barely mentioned; is there something wrong with it or it didn't live up to the hype? But, many say they love their Q750/1500 and discount the negative comments.

In another thread, a member started waxing poetic on CRT's and I thought about a Canadian made 8" Electrohome projector that I didn't buy for $2500 a few years ago ($80k new). Complete with the auto focus gizmo.

And now "everybody" is talking about the Sony 4k, which has a $$$ bulb! Oh...and is $20,000. Not my snack bracket.

The Runco claims to be adaptable to every format. After reading about the Sony 4k and re-reading the Runco website literature, I realize (I think) that for scope, the Runco requires an expensive optional lens and that other formats can be stretched to fill a screen. I have a 60" Pioneer Elite that wants to try to fill the screen (I can probably program this, but I'm enjoying the TV, even as it is, too much to take the time). It isn't until there are captions or titles that I realize how much picture I'm missing. So I end up going through the different picture sizes.

I want to see what the director wanted me to see. And I'd rather have letterbox if that is how I see it. I don't like the distortion created by the stretch to fill. Someone mentioned an LED pj, "under $10k", that can project a 2.35:1 image without an optional lens or artificially stretching the digital information. Runco talks about stretching the image to take advantage of all of the pixels. This is where I get confused. Does this mean that this other pj expands the letter boxed image to fit the 2.35:1 screen by zooming or by electronically expanding the data to fill the chip before projection? Or does the Blue-ray disc have this full size image encoded on the disc?

I "think" the speakers have just moved to behind the screen (I thought there were issues with this), and the screen has stretched to 10' 6"-ish on a 12' wide wall (before wall coverings). It will be CIH (I got dizzy on that part of the thread). I picked up a like-new McIntosh system (circa 1990) with a MC7270 amp and XRT 23 reference speakers that have to fit in for music. It has been suggested that they would also make great front speakers...comments?

Can somebody PLEASE put me back on track?

Details about the room that this is going into: This is a dedicated HT and music listening room in a new basement addition. The room has poured concrete walls (ICF's), no windows and an 8" corrugated steel pan for a ceiling, covered with 6" of concrete/ 5mm rubber/ 3/4" plywood/hardwood flooring. The dimensions are 16' W x 26' L x 9' H stepping down to 11' at the screen end. Right now it makes a great carpentry shop, until I finish the trim upstairs (I am replicating the 1907 white oak mill work).

Thanks for your reply.

This is where I'm looking for advice on projectors, in general, based on experience. I understand the premise that more must be better and that something better will be coming out next week. I wasn't considering 3D, now I am. I'm also old enough to realize that enough is enough. Several members have stated that you shouldn't rely on the LED spec's alone; that the Runco Q750/1500's perform better than spec's would indicate along side non-LED projectors. I also realize that the lighting control plays a huge part in perceived brightness. I am seeing that many HT are not dedicated and therefore have "blackout" curtains over windows. Given the specifics of my HT room with complete lighting control and the unknown projection distance required for the screen size, I was looking for guidance into what I should be looking at, unless a reader has specific experience with one of these (or comparable) projectors in a similar situation. When you go to the Runco LED page, they say that screens can vary from 8' to 40' wide, and certainly imply that their machines can do much more than I need. It was actually two salesmen, at two stores, that told me that one of these projectors was perfect for my HT.

As for the 2.35:1 AR, i will check out that section, thank you. As you say, all equipment is designed for 16:9, and I will be watching much of that format, so these same projectors must be relied on for the wide-screen movie experience. I have a basic understanding of the many ways that the conversion can be done, I guess I was asking those of you with projectors in the $3-10k range how the projectors actually perform in reality, manufacturers claims aside. I assume that many of you have had several projectors and have realized that a specific projector or company has a better than average understanding of what really works and gives the best bang for the buck. I trust first-hand practical experience over manufacturers claims or the opinion of a salesman, whom I don't know, who is trying to sell me something. I was in retail camera sales once and had to get out because of the BS that went on.

If this is not the type of info shared in this section, my apologies.

"I have demoed a couple of the latest LED models along with the latest JVC, 4K Sony etc.and the LED would be my choice - incredibly sharp, reference colour, no rainbows and what I would class as 'good enough' black levels for whats that worth. Probably best for screens in the region of 90-110" they could possibly do bigger, you'd have to ask an owner for more detail to choose the right gain screen. Unless perhaps you could dial down a 3 chipper to work at that size. What size screen did you envisage?" Daniel

My screen wall is 16' 1" w before any kind of finish is applied on the Styrofoam concrete forms (so I currently have flat, solid walls that I have to apply DW and/or soft material to w/ "?" thickness). Reading various build threads, I came on the screen size calculator in "What I would have done differently". 80% of the wall width, 153" would be the max screen width, making the CIH, 64.7" for 2.35:1 and then 115" wide for 16:9. At SH x 2 = 10' 9" for the front row seating would give me the "optimum" 48⁰ for 16:9 and 60⁰ for 2.35:1 (figures from Runco site). This actually works for my layout of two rows in front of where I had made the 2' step (concrete!) and the third row on top. 2nd row is on a 12" riser.

So I guess I'm past the 90-110". Looking at the Sim2 Mico 50, you mentioned, it suggests a 273.62" (range 234-313") "D". "On the surface" it looks like it works...yikes, just saw the price! Guess it is the same-ish for the Q750 that I was looking at (and hoping will come down in the next year).

What's OP? old phart?



'What's held LED's back is that they cost many times more." Noah

This is an interesting point. I guess I look at the longer term cost of operation. What is it worth to have a light source that stays virtually the same for 20-30k hrs vs a $4-600 bulb that fades continually and needs replacing after 2-4k hrs, not to mention set-up. This is how I justify to myself the cost of a better projector. The wife isn't always convinced.

I have a photography background. If you wonder why someone would pay $2k for a Leitz lens that does essentially the same thing as a $500 lens from Minolta? To begin with the Minolta will do a adequate job; the Leitz lens will still be doing it better 20 years+ down the line. I would assume that the same analogy holds for any projector with moving parts. Money should buy quality of construction. And the money vs quality usually increases exponentially.

Thanks to all for your input. It looks like I have 3 or 4 contenders in the "possible" fantasy list and a couple to watch in the realistic range.

I liked "Old Phart"

Sadly...I think you are absolutely right. The bulb thing is how I trick myself into spending more...thanks for ruining that for me.

I hadn't seen the screen size calculator before and was thinking in terms of a 10' 6" screen, with speakers on either side. I had a nagging feeling that I was dumping all this money into a room that was not the fantasy picture that I had hoped for. After starting this thread and checking some details before responding to some of your postings, I found the calculator and did the numbers with a better understanding of what was possible (looking at BEF's build thread)... I realized the screen potential and I actually marked it on the wall. 64.7" vs 51" CIH (CIH vs CIW vs CIA, another great thread). I sat there looking at how stupid I had been, I mean, I said that looks good.

So, I guess this changes a few things. The beauty of group discussions!!! What the hell, by next year I'll have 3 kids in university, what's another 20k? sob

BTW When I started planning this latest design for an addition and became more serious about the actual details for a HT, I actually sacrificed the north side of the addition for the HT to get the size and put the wine cellar on the south side (so I had to buy a cellar A/C unit). Everybody and their dog came out of the wood work and wanted to be part of the design/build. I listened to what they said and made mental notes; some good and some... I came across AVS a year ago and read threads when I could. I came back 2 weeks ago and I have to say that I've learned more from YOU guys than I could have pretty much any where else. Yes, I could have hired one of the high end audio places to do the design, but as I sat in one of one store's two HT's, the salesman asked, "what do you think". My answer was that the sound sucked. He agreed and said they had done 8 so far and only 1 sounded great! When I asked another builder how he designed for acoustics, he said that he builds a room and then deals with the sound electronically. He's done two in my neighbourhood! My audio service guy, put me onto his friend who used to design speakers before the competition (bread and butter) went over seas. He is interested in helping me design speakers and tune them for my bottomless pit for income disposal.

I've asked some pretty naive questions on AVS and yet you took the time to educate me. Thank you.

The on/off was what sold me on the LED. And the "bulb" life. Hopefully, by the time I'm ready to invest, the lumens output will handle a 152" x 65" screen. There is a lot of research going on in commercial/home LED lighting to replace the CFL bulbs etc.. Otherwise, I am stuck with the reality that I will have a bulb and a UPS. But, replacing the bulb every 300 hours Andy? That's dedication! I guess $2.70/movie isn't much...

What was this about "Laser"?

The Pioneer Kuro Elite Plasma panels are amazing. They had brought out a projector just in time to get out of AV. Has anyone tried it?

Re the Pioneer Elite PFJ 1 projector.
I just talked to the dealer that I bought my elite panels from. He said the projector, yes JVC, was not worth buying. Worth about $1400 by today's standards. He couldn't sell them and finally made Pioneer buy them back.

Hi Andy, Actually 11' high and 16' wide. I had been thinking about 10-10 1/2' wide for the screen with the speakers on either side (I had heard about issues with putting the speakers behind the screen - brightness/contrast/ sound acuity - from the same salesman who's HT was "less than inspiring"). It wasn't until I saw the quality and science going into some HT's on AVS where they were putting the speakers behind, that I realized that it can't possibly be that bad. So the screen has, in theory, moved 2' forward and gone to 152"/115" x 65" for 2.35:1/16:9 CIH.

I'm guessing the high frequencies would be most affected by being behind the screen (?), but the 6' tall tweeter towers could actually hang on the wall beside the screen...this having been said, they will have to be position tested for optimal sound for music listening. The goal of this HT is to double as a music listening room with critical consideration for optimizing the audio experience in both modes. Hence the concept of two separate sound systems. Best image possible is a given - I'm planning on winning the lottery real soon (possible = budget). I've been in ONE HT (including audio shop demo HT's) that I would put into the WOW category. I want to do better. One of the two theatres in my neighbourhood that I mentioned, built by the contractor who said, "I build a box and deal with the sound electronically", is for a guy in an "internationally acclaimed band" who does "have a million dollars." Sorry, this is off topic.

I still get a chuckle out of the "enivironmental concerns" of a Projector
A Home Theatre is an exercise in decadence -> construction, furnishings & decor, equipment, and electricity to run it all

- Andy[/quote]

Decadence is Marie Antoinette building a mini village outside Versailles say that she could play "peasant girl". Anything less is bare necessities. Don't touch me!