Originally Posted by Bytehoven
No offense taken woofer.
When i watch the 990, i can see what i would like to improve upon. I do believe the 4500 would move my viewing experience in the right direction. It just comes down to a cost benefit calculation, which enables me to be satisfied with the level of performance i can afford.
IF, the nx9 does indeed move the ball as you think, it would demand a closer look. So, getting comparative feedback of the nx9 from experienced 4500 owners, will be of great interest.
Thanks for comments.
Byte, I agree with you that for years, black level and high contrast have been the talking points for JVCs and we were told that as far as 4K vs. faux k that they looked about the same from normal seating positions. Better ANSI contrast meant nothing before. And eshift noise was easy to live with.
I really had a pleasant experience using my X990, but my issue was with HDR. The image looked off somehow. I concluded it was related to tone-mapping.
Still, I was optimistic and returned to JVC, this time for the NX9.
The moral of the story is that sometimes the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
Last thing here, as far as the the NX9 vs. RS4500, here's a little game (don't forget I have favorites
1)Initial cost/price, 2) contrast, 3) black level, 4) resolution/eshift 8K, 5)ease of calibration 6)3D 7)operation noise--advantage NX9
1) Laser/longevity, 2)no need for multiple repeat calibrations, 3)brightness 4)Laser off/fade to black 5)lamp savings --advantage RS4500
I can't imagine the contrast of the NX9 with that 18 element lens!!!