or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NEW RANGE JVC 2014 - Page 26

post #751 of 3973
One can say most anything they want to proffer here. Just don't be surprised if you are called on it and don't bitch because you are called. Brains should be put fully in gear before posting. Not something I always do either. That's why I purchased a dunce cap. Something most of us should consider a purchase of.
post #752 of 3973
Well, don't single out a guy for what everybody else does. People come to the forum to get incite on what to buy also. Just because its a AVScience forum doesn't mean that the main thing people come to the forum is for others opinion on what to buy.
post #753 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

Were the 4K upscaling Lumagen's even available 10.5 months ago????

Not trying to disparage anyone but when I read Oppo did a much better job of upscaling than a Lumagen it rings alarm bells.....Oppo may be better but much better? In fact, I've never read any posts where anyone thought Lumagen upscaling was inferior to any other upscaling solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

If he likes it better, he likes it better. No need of trying to provide him wrong. They got shipped yesterday and people can see for themselves. Even if its close, the Oppo is much cheaper
I'm not trying to prove him wrong but if you're saying I can't question the findings then I think we have a problem. Up until I read that sentence I had never heard of anyone claiming some other product upscaled better than a Lumagen. Also as Mike G pointed out the Lumagen he sold Joe was returned 10.5 months ago. I may be in error but I do not think Lumagen had a model that would upscale to 4K 10.5 months ago and if that's the case some clarification is in order.
Edited by Geof - 10/5/13 at 5:02pm
post #754 of 3973
Gone are the days of truly honest reviews, some get special deals on equipment for their personal use and favorable comments aid that end, if a commercial organization advertising revenue dictate the degree of honesty.

I would take findings with a handfull of salt from anyone who sells the products 'reviewed' 'or benefits in anyway from such comments.

In Cine4Home and Zombie I trust!...and Greg Rogers back in the day!
post #755 of 3973
Joe has changed a bit from his initial post that the Messiah has arrived. But I think the overall read would say he thinks the Oppo has changed the ball game. By implication he seems to say it scales to 4K much better than the Sony and it err Darbeeizes much better than a stand alone Darblet. He says he didn't like the Lumagen, when he owned a 1080p one and when he borrowed a 4K one. He said he didn't like the 4K scaling which he says others have reported as being soft though he concedes that if Lumagen improved it (Jim P reported here that a glitch which made it appear somewhat soft was fixed) that he hadn't seen one with the improvement. He states he doesn't think video processors are necessary given todays sources, av receivers, and displays. He sets forth some of the testing procedures he used for the Oppo (after being prodded with a pitch fork to do so) but refuses to respond to most questions about those procedures and continues to state the Darbee process in the Oppo has been improved because regardless of what Oppo says because he can see a drastic improvement. He is unwilling to do tests suggested by us to test this and refuses to discuss settings in things like source boxes and even in the Oppo used to process outside sources. Please feel free to correct this as necessary.

Why is he being picked on for stating his opinion? Because, see the above pp, and the way he states it and explains his reasoning (I am being very very charitable here in categorizing it as reasoning but hey that's just the kinda guy I am). BTW Joe and I are friends. He is a good guy. He is just a tad egotistical and his analytical powers are somewhat lacking. He does have a lot of strengths, both personal and with respect to his contributions to the AV community (but he does damage it too), and his wife is hot.


Joe, There is no need to thank me for my compliments.
Edited by mark haflich - 10/5/13 at 6:42pm
post #756 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

Well, don't single out a guy for what everybody else does. People come to the forum to get incite on what to buy also. Just because its a AVScience forum doesn't mean that the main thing people come to the forum is for others opinion on what to buy.

The main thing the frequent posters in this forum come here to accomplish is to get relief which without would require frequent visits to group therapy sessions led by a costly professional. Some would require and really still require frequent visits to a shrink.
post #757 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The main thing the frequent posters in this forum come here to accomplish is to get relief which without would require frequent visits to group therapy sessions led by a costly professional. Some would require and really still require frequent visits to a shrink.

The reason I am in therapy is from this forum smile.gif
Or maybe some of the type of thinking that goes into some of my posts, has caused me to need therapy, or maybe it's all your fault because your posts are too funny sometimes (yes you crack some bad jokes, but every now and then you hit the big one).
post #758 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The main thing the frequent posters in this forum come here to accomplish is to get relief which without would require frequent visits to group therapy sessions led by a costly professional. Some would require and really still require frequent visits to a shrink.

This place is definitely our Breakfast Club, or Cheers or whatever you want to call it.............



Yes, that, but another reason I come here is to eat up valuable time that could be spent bettering myself or my career (still trying to figure out what this is exactly). I am just trying to make a conscious effort not to be an overachiever because nobody likes a showoff. I think I am doing a great job!








biggrin.gif
post #759 of 3973
You are!
post #760 of 3973
Where is all of this discussion taking place?

It's not in the official 103D thread.
post #761 of 3973
In an earlier post I said
Quote:
I also question what is gained here...
1st case: Feed 1080p to the new JVC's - they in turn upscale this to 4K, then down sample that into two 1080p sub frames.
2nd case: Feed 1080p upscaled to 4K to the JVC....they in turn downsample this into two 1080p sub frames.

The only apparent difference is what device is doing the upscaling from 1080p to 4K. So, what differences might we see? I guess this remains to be seen but I remain doubtful that there will be any meaningful differences (I do think in the case of a real 4K machines (the Sony's) any upscaling differences would be more apparent compared to the JVC 4k eshifted image).

Then I started thinking about this chart:



I believe the new JVC's HDMI chips are limited to 10.2GB.

My question above should not have asked what is gained, it should have asked what is lost. Right now the general recommendation is to feed JVC's with 4:2:2 but the chart shows upscaling to 4K60p forces 4:2:0 which is not my first choice. Too much is lost.

Fortunately upscaling 1080/24p still allows 4:2:2 but then I keep asking myself how much does the internal JVC downsampling of 4K into two 1080p sub-frames mask any 2K to 4K scaling artifacts and does it really matter if the upscaling of 2K to 4K is done internally or externally? Thoughts?
Edited by Geof - 10/5/13 at 6:07pm
post #762 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Joe has changed a bit from his initial post that the Messiah has arrived. But I think the overall read would say he thinks the Oppo has changed the ball game. By implication he seems to say it scales to 4K much better than the Sony it err darbeeizes much better than a stand alone Darblet. He says he didn't like the Lumagen, when he owned a 1080p one and when he borrowed a 4K one. He said he didn't like the 4Ks scaling which he says others have reported as being soft though he concedes that if Lumagen improved it (Jim P reported here that a glitch which made it appear somewhat soft was fixed) that he hadn't seen one with the improvement. He states he doesn't think video processors are necessary given todays source, av receivers, and displays. He sets forth some of the testing procedures he used for the Oppo (after being prodded with a pitch fork to do so) but refuses to respond to most questions about those procedures and continues to state the Darbee process in the Oppo has been improved because regardless of what Oppo says he can see a drastic improvement. He is unwilling to do tests suggested by us to test this and refuses to discuss settings in things like source boxes and even in the Oppo used to process outside sources. Please feel free to correct this as necessary.
Thanks for clarifying that Mark.
post #763 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

The reason I am in therapy is from this forum smile.gif
Or maybe some of the type of thinking that goes into some of my posts, has caused me to need therapy, or maybe it's all your fault because your posts are too funny sometimes (yes you crack some bad jokes, but every now and then you hit the big one).

Good one Coderguy.

I do not claim to bat anything close to 1000 humor or otherwise.

The only person around here that claims to bat 1000, although a few others would claim they are real close, is Joerod. If you claim a ball he hit didn't clear the yellow stripe on the top of the fence, he sounds like Warner Wolf. Let's roll the (analogue) video tape when its developed. smile.gif It will prove me right.

I als think that many post here seeking agreement that whatever decisions they reached or executed re AV equipment are the correct decisions. Buy new, buy used, don't buy, use this, don't use this . . . .
Edited by mark haflich - 10/5/13 at 6:39pm
post #764 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Where is all of this discussion taking place?

It's not in the official 103D thread.

I know, these jvc projectors probably cannot use the 4k upscaling. No point of even talking about it anymore
post #765 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Where is all of this discussion taking place?

It's not in the official 103D thread.

in the VW1000 thread.
post #766 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

In an earlier post I said
Then I started thinking about this chart:



I believe the new JVC's HDMI chips are limited to 10.2GB.

My question above should not have asked what is gained, it should have asked what is lost. Right now the general recommendation is to feed JVC's with 4:2:2 but the chart shows upscaling to 4K60p forces 4:2:0 which is not my first choice. Too much is lost.

Fortunately upscaling 1080/24p still allows 4:2:2 but then I keep asking myself how much does the internal JVC downsampling of 4K into two 1080p sub-frames mask any 2K to 4K scaling artifacts and does it really matter if the upscaling of 2K to 4K is done internally or externally? Thoughts?

Geof. 4:2:2 employs 25% more chroma subsampling then 4:2:0.. However, to one eye's, very little is lost going to 4:2:0 from 4:2:2. The last 2 is blue subsampling and our eyes are very unsensitive to blue and blue chroma errors. Blurays are encoded at 4:2:0 which is ultimately up converted to 4:4:4 in steps by the Bluray player and down stream devices including the display device with I think extremely good results.
Edited by mark haflich - 10/5/13 at 7:21pm
post #767 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Geof. 4:2:2 employs 25% more chroma subsampling then 4:2:0.. However, to one eye's, very little is lost going from 4:2:0 from 4:2:2. The last 2 is blue subsampling and our eyes are very unsensitive to blue and blue chroma errors. Blurays are encoded at 4:2:0 and which is ultimately up converted to 4:4:4 by in steps by the Bluray player and down stream devices including the display device with I think extremely good results.
Good points Mark.
It's the end result that counts and I'm sure it'll look great no matter what it's fed.
post #768 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

One can say most anything they want to proffer here. Just don't be surprised if you are called on it and don't bitch because you are called. Brains should be put fully in gear before posting. Not something I always do either. That's why I purchased a dunce cap. Something most of us should consider a purchase of.

This will have to be added to the AVS smiley faces on the right going forward Mark... a one button call out if you will! tongue.gif

post #769 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

I know, these jvc projectors probably cannot use the 4k upscaling. No point of even talking about it anymore

Why would you say that? They accept 4k input. The only real question is whether or not future new 4K sources using HDCP 2.2 will be able to be played on these JVCs. Accepting an up scaled 4K signal from a current player isn't in question.
post #770 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanbryan View Post

Why would you say that? They accept 4k input. The only real question is whether or not future new 4K sources using HDCP 2.2 will be able to be played on these JVCs. Accepting an up scaled 4K signal form a current player isn't in question.

We will see if and when it does, how effective it will be. If its good, then eshift is applied to it, it might to a good thing.
post #771 of 3973
They were being fed 4K from redray servers at CEDIA
post #772 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanbryan View Post

They were being fed 4K from redray servers at CEDIA

Thats true, it should work with no problem than
post #773 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

kevin, they are still showing a 3D port on the back of the new models. Hopefully it's still compatible with the current IR / MV3D transmitter.

900x900px-LL-ad4855fc_Connectique-597x377.jpeg

also the software for the DI wasn't finalized, so we'll have to wait for Cine4home's first impressions, hopefully soon.

For those who were concerned about existing 3D IR investments on the new PJs... Mike G confirmed (as to what he was told by JVC mind you), the 3DIN emitter port on the back will support either the old IR or new RF dongle.

Jason - Are you still using your IR/RF Gerry rig splitter? wink.gif
post #774 of 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by krichter1 View Post

For those who were concerned about existing 3D IR investments on the new PJs... Mike G confirmed (as to what he was told by JVC mind you), the 3DIN emitter port on the back will support either the old IR or new RF dongle.

Jason - Are you still using your IR/RF Gerry rig splitter? wink.gif

it still works!! smile.gif

3d-splitter3.jpg
post #775 of 3973
If you read the JVC press release, it says that the 3D RF functionality is carried over from the 2013 models:

Key features carried over from the 2013 line include:
- Active shutter glasses for 3D viewing use RF rather than IR technology to offer more stable synchronization and extended range while avoiding possible interference with IR-controlled devices.


If so, one could assume that the 3D emitter setup on the new projectors is exactly the same as the 2013 projectors, and therefore, that both of the existing RF and IR emitter dongles will work fine.
post #776 of 3973
I read that as well but I'd prefer not ass-u-me when it comes to JVC if ya know what I mean (chalk it up to past experience). wink.gif
post #777 of 3973
Kevin. You were right about the Pats. At least Da Bears kept them company. Red Sox in 3 or 4?
post #778 of 3973
Broncos
post #779 of 3973

I think it may be possible with an HTPC only, but no consumer device would allow that.

32.gif

post #780 of 3973
All the HDMI 1.4 silicon on the market right now is 297Mhz which is a pixel clock that is capable of transmitting all the 4096 x 2160/3840 x 2160 resolutions at the various 24/25/30 framerates.

3840 x 2160 @ 60 fps is not possible on a single cable using the HDMI 1.4 standard. Even if the data island in a TMDS stream had vertical and horizontal blanking reduced to zero and you had silicon running at the maximum 340Mhz specified in the 1.4 standard, you still couldn't do it. You would need it to run well over 500Mhz to do this.

So we know JVC is using something beyond HDMI1.4 but not quite 2.0.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home