Official JVC RS3000/NX9 - JVC RS2000/NX7/N7 - JVC RS1000/NX5/N5 - Owners Thread - Page 252 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 16621Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7531 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by woofer View Post
Just arrived in Aus... Feb manufacture date...

Another....Brand New NX7 .......would you believe........."Faulty!!"
Yeah, given their track record so far.
Jmouse007 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7532 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:39 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by woofer View Post
Just arrived in Aus... Feb manufacture date...

Another....Brand New NX7 .......would you believe........."Faulty!!"
These larger heavier projectors are not doing very well with shipping.
Reddig likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7533 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:41 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Same experience coming from 590R to RS1000. That tells me it’s normal, new mechanism must be noiser. Not a big deal to me as it’s not something happening during movie. DI is quiet and no e-shift noise is what matters.

RS1000 vs 590R : what is the black level ? who win ?
shin_iori is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7534 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by alebonau View Post
that's crazy woofer ! is this your 2nd one dead or something ? or is it 2 out of what is it 3 in the country we likely have now ? at what point does JVC realise that they have to do something like testing and verifying each one in the country. use a decent courier service and double boxing and such !
You are assuming that JVC is sending them out like this. I think that is a wrong assumption, based on many JVC's here in the US, that have been inspected arriving messed up.
Reddig likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7535 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:48 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
You are assuming that JVC is sending them out like this. I think that is a wrong assumption, based on many JVC's here in the US, that have been inspected arriving messed up.
It doesn't really matter why it is happening. JVC is responsible for engineering the product and packaging so that it can withstand transport via common carrier. From the number of issues we are seeing on supposedly inspected units it is pretty clear the damage is occurring during shipping. There are people on here who have damaged units, with relatively intact boxes, at that point you can't really blame the carriers.
rak306 likes this.
malba2366 is offline  
post #7536 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:50 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwestley View Post
I have a close friend who is considering getting a NX7 or NX5 and he has a very small room 12x12 feet with a 106 screen. What is the minimum distance he would need? In the past this friend had both JVC & Sony projectors and he was able to fill the screen. I have read that the 4K panels require a slightly longer throw and was wondering it the new models would work in his room?
I have checked different projector calculators and get slightly different results.
Either he does not have a 12' x 12' room or he does not have a 106" diagonal 16:9 screen. JVC can't throw a 106" diagonal image in a 12' x 12' room, unless you use a mirror. Neither can the Sony projectors.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7537 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 10:57 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwestley View Post
No luck with a closet but I suggested that he could have the sheet rock could around the projector. The problem it is a rear wall. In the past I know he owned several other JVC projectors with no problem.
Probably the best way would be to reduce the screen size 1 inch on each side if things don't work out. I know someone who did that using black velvet tape.
Going back six years, none of the 1080P Sony or JVC's could fill 106" in 12' x 12' room.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7538 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:03 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by malba2366 View Post
It doesn't really matter why it is happening. JVC is responsible for engineering the product and packaging so that it can withstand transport via common carrier. From the number of issues we are seeing on supposedly inspected units it is pretty clear the damage is occurring during shipping. There are people on here who have damaged units, with relatively intact boxes, at that point you can't really blame the carriers.
may not matter to you, but it sure matters to me. I would consider JVC sending out a large number of defective projectors a much worse problem than projectors not surviving shipping. Yes, JVC is responsible for designing packaging that survives reasonable handling.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7539 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
These larger heavier projectors are not doing very well with shipping.
JVC needs to desperately rethink/redesign their internal shock absorbtion packaging in light of the massive projector weight increase across their entire native 4K line, and also either "light a fire" under the shipping companies they have contracted to ship them, or change shipping contractors.
markmon1 and deltagamma like this.
Jmouse007 is offline  
post #7540 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
You are assuming that JVC is sending them out like this. I think that is a wrong assumption, based on many JVC's here in the US, that have been inspected arriving messed up.
It doesn't matter, JVC should have thought this through ahead of time and redesigned the internal packaging to better compensate for the massive, additional PJ weight increase and come up with packaging and materials that can better withstand the shock and rigors of normal shipping without the projectors being defective/faulty/DOA upon arrival at their destination.
markmon1, Reddig and deltagamma like this.
Jmouse007 is offline  
post #7541 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Clark Burk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Baltimore,MD.USA
Posts: 1,985
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 712 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
These larger heavier projectors are not doing very well with shipping.
Perhaps JVC will rethink the idea of using styrofoam and switch to a more impact forgiving form of dense foam to protect the projectors during shipping. It will likely double or more their shipping cost but in the long run possibly save them money in returns and provide a better customer confidence level. I think that is something buyers would not mind paying extra for. It would make it far easier to ship in case repairs were needed and also when the time comes to upgrade and sell to a new buyer.
cargen, markmon1 and deltagamma like this.

Clark
Clark Burk is offline  
post #7542 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rwestley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,185
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 460 Post(s)
Liked: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Burk View Post
Perhaps JVC will rethink the idea of using styrofoam and switch to a more impact forgiving form of dense foam to protect the projectors during shipping. It will likely double or more their shipping cost but in the long run possibly save them money in returns and provide a better customer confidence level. I think that is something buyers would not mind paying extra for. It would make it far easier to ship in case repairs were needed and also when the time comes to upgrade and sell to a new buyer.
I just was over someone's house who just received a Monoprice Monolith Subwoofer and the packing was excellent. Double boxed, flexible foam and cardboard posts between the two boxes. JVC has to do something like this. The Monoprice subwoofers weight even more that these new projectors.
Dandlj likes this.
rwestley is online now  
post #7543 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 803
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 678 Post(s)
Liked: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwestley View Post
No luck with a closet but I suggested that he could have the sheet rock could around the projector. The problem it is a rear wall. In the past I know he owned several other JVC projectors with no problem.
Probably the best way would be to reduce the screen size 1 inch on each side if things don't work out. I know someone who did that using black velvet tape.
I didn't see anyone mention this yet, but if he is mostly just playing 2.35:1 movies, then you could use the full 4K panel (4096px) to get a larger image.

You can fill the width of a 106" diagonal 16:9 screen with the lens only 10ft 3in away from the screen according to the calculators if you use the full 1.9:1 panel in the zoom mode.


This is what I am going to be doing in my room to get a bit larger image.
rwestley likes this.
SirMaster is online now  
post #7544 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 11:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
stumlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Going back six years, none of the 1080P Sony or JVC's could fill 106" in 12' x 12' room.

If I recall correctly, I had a 13x12 room in my old house and ran my RS40 (and previous RS1) on a 106" 16:9 diagonal screen, I still had a bit of zoom leftover.. the projector itself was as far back against the wall as possible though on a shelf.
stumlad is offline  
post #7545 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rwestley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,185
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 460 Post(s)
Liked: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
I didn't see anyone mention this yet, but if he is mostly just playing 2.35:1 movies, then you could use the full 4K panel (4096px) to get a larger image.

You can fill the width of a 106" diagonal 16:9 screen with the lens only 10ft 3in away from the screen according to the calculators if you use the full 1.9:1 panel in the zoom mode.


This is what I am going to be doing in my room to get a bit larger image.
This is good to know. That is what I saw on the calculator with the 1.9:1 panel.
rwestley is online now  
post #7546 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwestley View Post
I just was over someone's house who just received a Monoprice Monolith Subwoofer and the packing was excellent. Double boxed, flexible foam and cardboard posts between the two boxes. JVC has to do something like this. The Monoprice subwoofers weight even more that these new projectors.
BINGO! This is true of SVS, PARASOUND, etc... . At this point, there's no excuse. JVC knew, these new projectors weighed almost double the weight of their previous projectors and should have seriously taken this factor into consideration.
rwestley, deltagamma and Colozeus like this.

Last edited by Jmouse007; 03-11-2019 at 02:55 PM.
Jmouse007 is offline  
post #7547 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rwestley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,185
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 460 Post(s)
Liked: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmouse007 View Post
BINGO! SAmerican is true of SVS, PARASOUND, etc... . At this point, there's no excuse. JVC knew, these new projectors weighed almost double the weight of their previous projectors and should have seriously taken this factor into consideration.
I would hope that they make changes in their shipping box fast. The fact that some units are damaged even if the box is fine might cost JVC a lot. I doubt if
a shipping company will cover damage if the box is fine. I would also suggest that heavy labels be put on the box and something that states that a helper is needed to lift item.
rwestley is online now  
post #7548 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,859
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1274 Post(s)
Liked: 789
I'm really concerned about the shipping issues I'm reading about with these new projectors. I'm not an early adopter for next gen projectors, but I sure like getting into that second version when the kinks have been worked out.

This is a different kind of kink to work through, however. I'm not sure what JVC can do about the shipping companies' handling of their equipment. Sure, better boxing sounds great, but is that going to be the answer? Are these projectors just too heavy and sensitive to make it to our homes?

Last thing we need is a frustrated JVC unable to get their equipment to us without an unacceptably high frequency of damage.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: RBH SV-661R and SV-661CR fronts, Jamo 626k4 side/rear surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #7549 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,859
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1274 Post(s)
Liked: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
Hey guys, tonight we had a few folks over from avsforums and we compared an RS3000 to my RS4500. I'm not sure what the consensus was, but here was my take on it:

The RS3000 surprised me and was much better than I expected. The unit we had here had great overall focus and convergence. Unfortunately, my RS4500 has some convergence issues and I've used zone convergence to correct them. I'm not going to go into great details on that, but on actual content, at first, the RS4500 still seemed a tiny bit sharper. But when we kicked on 8K eshift, the RS3000 actually got a tiny bit sharper. In fact, this was one of the biggest surprises that 8K eshift was actually worth something. We all liked it and didn't notice any noise from it. Of course during test pattern analysis, it was worse with eshift on. Also (at least on this unit) the 8k eshift was deadly silent no buzzing at all.

The tone mapping helped a lot over the pure HDR mode from the past, but while the image got brighter, it was a little washed out in my opinion. Im sure this can be tweaked more, but madVR brightened the image a lot more and at the same time gave it better blacks and a lot more pop. The RS3000 looked tons better running blade runner 2049 through madVR than through its internal tone mapping.

The RS3000 deep black performance was a bit disappointing to me. It was noticeably worse than my RS4500 and in my estimate only a little better than say a Sony 675ES. It appears JVC no longer clamps the iris down like they use to (only comparing SDR here no HDR on this). I've said a few times that the RS4500 is the minimum black performance I can handle. If I had bought an RS3000, I'd not be ok with it. I'd have to return it and go back to an RS640 until the black performance was improved. This was only on the darkest scenes like the interstellar 53:30 star field, ending credits, some of the expanse. Dark night time scenes looked fantastic such as an 8K city at night showing fireworks. Note that this is nothing similar to the reports from other owners on here. We had FW v1.17 and used auto2. JVC is going to need to do something to make the DI more iris more active. We did not test auto1 (I thought auto2 was the more aggressive).

The RS3000 image looked as stable and clean (to me) as my RS4500. The light from the laser felt a little punchier and the whites were a bit whiter, but that may be a calibration thing and/or the yellowing dynamic iris issue. I was expecting a noisier image. That's not what I saw.

The RS3000 motion was the best motion I've ever seen on any projector including my old Sony 675ES. With the CMD enabled, for example, we compared to the RS4500 side-by-side and the RS4500 takes 1/2 a second or so to get stable on back ground pans. Like you might see: jerky-jerky-smooth-smooth-smooth. The RS3000 is stable instantly, no jerky frames first.

I came away much more impressed with the RS3000 than I thought I'd be. In fact, it showed that my RS4500 has some issues that may need to be handled via exchange.

Edit: I did not notice any DI pumping or such. When coming out of the interstellar star field it did marsh mellow up a bit like the RS640 did, but it was much less noticeable. This is probably because the DI is really not doing very much like it did in the past. We heard it operating but I seldom noticed it doing much. It did kick in on very dark scenes, but again, not very aggressively.
Ugh, this is disappointing.

I can't imagine dropping $16K on a new JVC projector and having to sacrifice my favorite thing about JVC projectors.

Better motion panning and resolution sounds fantastic, but if the blacks aren't at least as good as my rs620, I wouldn't be happy at all.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: RBH SV-661R and SV-661CR fronts, Jamo 626k4 side/rear surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #7550 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmouse007 View Post
JVC needs to desperately rethink/redesign their internal shock absorbtion packaging in light of the massive projector weight increase across their entire native 4K line, and also either "light a fire" under the shipping companies they have contracted to ship them, or change shipping contractors.
From my understanding, they did. It is not the same material used for last years projectors.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7551 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 24,558
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6674 Post(s)
Liked: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by mutiger View Post
It has to be purchased by March 31, but you have until April 30 to send in the rebate form. And my guess would be if they can't meet pre-order demand by then, they'll extend the free bulb offer. They risk losing pre-orders if they don't, including mine.
I knew this would be brought up with March 31st approaching, last week I reached out to my vendor and asked "On orders that are not filled, if these do not come in by the 31st, what happens to the bulb offer? It is not these people's fault there is no stock." JVC's answer back was "We will not disappoint any customers who have orders in place."

---That was the extent of what we where told.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
I'm really concerned about the shipping issues I'm reading about with these new projectors. I'm not an early adopter for next gen projectors, but I sure like getting into that second version when the kinks have been worked out.
The end user should have no concerns when it comes to damages except for reporting damage in the right time frame. The end user's just ordered the goods, it is up to the dealer, partially the manufacturer , and also the shipper of choice to get it to you in good condition.

So far so good over here, but we are doing more then just double boxing.....
Bill DePalma and Reddig like this.

Last edited by Cleveland Plasma; 03-11-2019 at 12:50 PM.
Cleveland Plasma is offline  
post #7552 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rwestley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,185
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 460 Post(s)
Liked: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
I'm really concerned about the shipping issues I'm reading about with these new projectors. I'm not an early adopter for next gen projectors, but I sure like getting into that second version when the kinks have been worked out.

This is a different kind of kink to work through, however. I'm not sure what JVC can do about the shipping companies' handling of their equipment. Sure, better boxing sounds great, but is that going to be the answer? Are these projectors just too heavy and sensitive to make it to our homes?

Last thing we need is a frustrated JVC unable to get their equipment to us without an unacceptably high frequency of damage.
Electronics are shipped everyday with no problem. I feel that JVC has had many issues but the shipping and packing have compounded the problems. JVC could start with flexible foam instead of styrofoam. They can also double box these units and use a foam cushion between the two boxes. The most important thing is that they change their packing and shipping methods immediately. It seem to me that there will be a lot of B units for sale soon if they can even get the problem ones fixed.
rwestley is online now  
post #7553 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Burk View Post
Perhaps JVC will rethink the idea of using styrofoam and switch to a more impact forgiving form of dense foam to protect the projectors during shipping. It will likely double or more their shipping cost but in the long run possibly save them money in returns and provide a better customer confidence level. I think that is something buyers would not mind paying extra for. It would make it far easier to ship in case repairs were needed and also when the time comes to upgrade and sell to a new buyer.
Keep in mind, usually they are shipped on a pallet to dealers and many dealers double box. So we are not talking about just JVC's packaging. After seeing pictures of the arrival box condition on some of these, I think a lot of the problem is handling, because I have see pictures of several projectors with boxes in bad shape. Often times with holes in the boxes. That has even happened on freight shipped projectors. It is like the shipping companies are now using Gorillas for handling.
Reddig likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7554 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:40 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
I didn't see anyone mention this yet, but if he is mostly just playing 2.35:1 movies, then you could use the full 4K panel (4096px) to get a larger image.

You can fill the width of a 106" diagonal 16:9 screen with the lens only 10ft 3in away from the screen according to the calculators if you use the full 1.9:1 panel in the zoom mode.


This is what I am going to be doing in my room to get a bit larger image.
What is he going to do when he watches 16:9 content on his screen, clip the height or reduce the size? Neither is a good answer.
Reddig likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7555 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:41 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,511
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12537 Post(s)
Liked: 10153
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by stumlad View Post
If I recall correctly, I had a 13x12 room in my old house and ran my RS40 (and previous RS1) on a 106" 16:9 diagonal screen, I still had a bit of zoom leftover.. the projector itself was as far back against the wall as possible though on a shelf.
Yes 13' works, but 12' does not.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #7556 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,859
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1274 Post(s)
Liked: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Keep in mind, usually they are shipped on a pallet to dealers and many dealers double box. So we are not talking about just JVC's packaging. After seeing pictures of the arrival box condition on some of these, I think a lot of the problem is handling, because I have see pictures of several projectors with boxes in bad shape. Often times with holes in the boxes. That has even happened on freight shipped projectors. It is like the shipping companies are now using Gorillas for handling.
I would agree. The general quality of "work" is in such steep decline. People used to give a crap at a much higher percentage than today.

How do we get Chick Fil-A workers into the shipping business?

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: RBH SV-661R and SV-661CR fronts, Jamo 626k4 side/rear surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #7557 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Jim Cutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
Posts: 492
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj Dee View Post
Tested a JVC N5 this weekend.
Here test results and revenue.

https://translate.google.com/transla...s%2F%3Fp%3D297
Very nice review. It sure makes me wonder if I should get the RS1000 instead of the RS2000 and put the difference toward an anamorphic lens. Although on of the drawbacks was the lack of a color filter. This could be like a gun or condom where it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it!

Theater Room - JVC RS2000, Dalite 148" Scope, Pioneer SC-65, Panasonic UB820, Energy APS 5+2(2), Energy AC 300(1), Energy CR-3(4), PSA 15"Sub(2)
Sports Room - JVC RS4810, Dalite 106" 16:9, Onkyo TX-SR875, Oppo BDP-103, Energy C-7(2) w/Energy S8.2(2), Energy C-C3(1) w/Energy S10.2(1), Energy CR-3(3), Energy S12.3
Jim Cutter is offline  
post #7558 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 12:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 803
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 678 Post(s)
Liked: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
What is he going to do when he watches 16:9 content on his screen, clip the height or reduce the size? Neither is a good answer.
It's a good question. This is why I am going to make a native 1.9:1 screen for when my NX5 comes, and for 16:9 was planning on clipping the top and bottom which you only lose like 2 inches. i doubt I would notice it, and in things that are super important to have the full picture, then just have small bars on the sides.

With a 16:9 screen maybe the best would be to convert it into a 1.9:1 screen by adding permanent masking to the top and bottom and do the same as me.

It depends on if he watches more 16:9 or 2.35:1.

But with a 1.9:1 screen and installation mode switching, you technically get the largest 2.35 and largest 16:9 pictures possible at that throw distance. And if you were OK having black bars on your 2.35 content, why not be OK with smaller side bars on 16:9 content? Or build small masking panels which is what I am probably going to do

I just wanted to bring up the option because maybe he watches 75% 2.35 content or something and maybe it's a workable choice.

Last edited by SirMaster; 03-11-2019 at 12:55 PM.
SirMaster is online now  
post #7559 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 01:08 PM
Member
 
mutiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Cutter View Post
Very nice review. It sure makes me wonder if I should get the RS1000 instead of the RS2000 and put the difference toward an anamorphic lens. Although on of the drawbacks was the lack of a color filter. This could be like a gun or condom where it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it!
Did you not watch the video from last week where the dude reviewed both and treated the RS1000 like an unwanted stepchild?
Jacob92175 likes this.
mutiger is offline  
post #7560 of 17964 Old 03-11-2019, 01:10 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 24,558
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6674 Post(s)
Liked: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
I would agree. The general quality of "work" is in such steep decline. People used to give a crap at a much higher percentage than today.

How do we get Chick Fil-A workers into the shipping business?
I think the whole world seems to be on a decline........
Quote:
Originally Posted by mutiger View Post
Did you not watch the video from last week where the dude reviewed both and treated the RS1000 like an unwanted stepchild?
I will continue to watch reviews with calibration charts posted Otherwise whats the point....
Cleveland Plasma is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Jvc , nx7 , nx9 , rs2000 , rs3000

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off