Official JVC RS3000/NX9 - JVC RS2000/NX7/N7 - JVC RS1000/NX5/N5 - Owners Thread - Page 317 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 13272Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #9481 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 06:56 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty View Post
I had a similar experience with a local dealer. He kept pushing the Sony 695 and took me to the back of his shop to show me some JVC's some people has supposedly returned. The 695 he had set up in his store did not look good at all (which suggests that perhaps he didn't know what he was doing or didn't care about proper setup). Looking back on the experience, I am so glad I didn't give his advice much credence and instead went with the RS2000, as the unit I have throws an awesome picture.

That kind of puts me in a spot. The next closest dealer is over 100 miles away. I guess I could call them and see what they would do. Thanks for the feedback smitty. Since I am still looking at upwards of $14k to spend. This might sway them..
john.odonnell01 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9482 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:02 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
tigerhonaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN. USA
Posts: 1,524
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 538 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Cutter View Post
So my RS2000 arrived today. Mike let me know it was double boxed and I'm glad he did. The outer box was a little beat up. I wish that it was marked with some stickers that noted it was fragile and which side was up. The outer box had air bags inserted between the box to help so I hope that it did. The inner box looks perfect so hopefully I'll have time to get it up and running this weekend. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I don't have a busy weekend on call!








And here she is in all her beautiful boxed glory. She's finally home!!!


Hi Jim,

Just my (Thoughts & Opinions) buddy on the way the outside box looks in the pictures you posted.
Good-Grief it surely was NOT handled with CARE that's for sure.

Thankfully the inside box with the actual JVC RS2000 projector looks GREAT !!!
Also, hopefully the projector has not been thrown around so much that the projector inside parts/electronics have been moved around.

I'll just post a few pictures of the way my JVC arrived and as you said about your's it did have those (Fragile Stickers) stickers on it.















Jim,

After the all the waiting buddy I really do hope the projector works as perfect as it should buddy.

Terry
aniv likes this.

JVC RS4500 Laser Projector:
My "New" Home Theater Up-Dates with Pictures, March 6th, 2019 .
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-ge...st-2018-a.html
tigerhonaker is offline  
post #9483 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:16 AM
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 grendelrt View Post
Who told you it was on backorder? I would like to get confirmation my form was ok and I am good to go if possible. I dont mind waiting for the bulb, I just want to make sure everything was good with my form before the mail in date is over.
My dealer inquired and was told the bulbs are most definitely on back-order. The early birds got them within a couple weeks because they had them in stock. The rest of us will have to wait, which is totally fine with me. You can probably inquire with JVC or your dealer (who can inquire), to see that JVC got your form. For those who haven't sent them in yet, certified mail is probably the best way to go (cost me $4.05), and then keep the receipt and take a picture of the completed form. What can go wrong will for some, but I get the impression JVC will not disappoint anybody with regards to this promo.
Tom Bley likes this.
mutiger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9484 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
grendelrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by mutiger View Post
My dealer inquired and was told the bulbs are most definitely on back-order. The early birds got them within a couple weeks because they had them in stock. The rest of us will have to wait, which is totally fine with me. You can probably inquire with JVC or your dealer (who can inquire), to see that JVC got your form. For those who haven't sent them in yet, certified mail is probably the best way to go (cost me $4.05), and then keep the receipt and take a picture of the completed form. What can go wrong will for some, but I get the impression JVC will not disappoint anybody with regards to this promo.
Thanks! I did send my certified mail as well but am always worried when it comes to rebates
grendelrt is offline  
post #9485 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DLCPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,355
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1560 Post(s)
Liked: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
Couldn't all this be automated? Isn't there some sort of lens slide out? I don't keep up on this stuff. I assume HTPC or Lumagen users don't have to worry about this right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason4vu View Post
Yes, you are correct.
As jason4vu points out, a CineSlide could be used to avoid manual removal. This adds in the vicinity of $2600 or more to the cost of the overall upgrade. One of the benefits of using a modern generation lens, that of not having to change the Projector's Zoom and Focus when switching between aspect ratios, would be lost by doing this. But for some, it would be an acceptable option.

Yes, the Lumagen (and presumably HTPC users as well but I haven't specifically confirmed that) will be able to work around the lack of proper JVC Anamorphic mode for 16:9 content, but not for 3D content, regardless of aspect ratio. This was confirmed by Kris Deering and Shawn Kelly, so I'd follow-up with them if you want to understand this further. It's a bit above my pay-grade!

JVC RS400, Marantz SR7010, Screen Innovations 160" 2.35:1 Screen
Front L/R: Duntech Sovereigns, powered by 2 bridged Adcom GFA-555
Center: Revel C208 powered by Cambridge Audio Azur 851W
Dolby Bed (4): Sony Core SS-CS5, Atmos (4): Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE
Subwoofer: DIY 8' sub with 4 18" SI Drivers, powered by iNuke 6000
DLCPhoto is offline  
post #9486 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:36 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Austin Tx
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 6
I’ve been into Home Theater for over twenty years and I’m now on my fifth projector, the JVC RS2000. I’ve owned projectors from Optoma, Epson, Sony and now JVC. Every projector that I’ve owned brought me years of enjoyment for what I could afford at the time and my new JVC is no exception. I’m blown away by the imaginary this JVC puts out at it’s price point, I personal can’t see any of it’s flaws at my viewing distance with normal viewing material “bright corners & yellowing” and think JVC hit it out of the park.

I’d like to thank Mike for his fantastic customer service, Aniv for taking the time to help me with tech questions because I’m not tech savvy and Jeff Meier for calibrating my Home Theater to it’s fullest potential, it’s never looked or sounded so good.
Jacob92175 is offline  
post #9487 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 07:44 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
tigerhonaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN. USA
Posts: 1,524
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 538 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob92175 View Post
I’ve been into Home Theater for over twenty years and I’m now on my fifth projector, the JVC RS2000. I’ve owned projectors from Optoma, Epson, Sony and now JVC. Every projector that I’ve owned brought me years of enjoyment for what I could afford at the time and my new JVC is no exception. I’m blown away by the imaginary this JVC puts out at it’s price point, I personal can’t see any of it’s flaws at my viewing distance with normal viewing material “bright corners & yellowing” and think JVC hit it out of the park.

I’d like to thank Mike for his fantastic customer service, Aniv for taking the time to help me with tech questions because I’m not tech savvy and Jeff Meier for calibrating my Home Theater to it’s fullest potential, it’s never looked or sounded so good.
Jacob,



It's nice to every once in awhile that a new owner likes and is enjoying their new projector as you are.


Terry


JVC RS4500 Laser Projector:
My "New" Home Theater Up-Dates with Pictures, March 6th, 2019 .
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-ge...st-2018-a.html
tigerhonaker is offline  
post #9488 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 08:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dkersten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 655 Post(s)
Liked: 1140
Got my RS2000 yesterday and got it set up. No shipping issues, outer box was a little squished but nothing unusual, inner box had one small ding on an edge that didn't go further than an inch into the box, and styrofoam was in perfect shape.

On initial inspection, the lens first appeared to have a big chip in it, but after looking closer it appears to be some adhesive, probably from the tape that holds the lens cap on. My working theory here is that when JVC USA QC'd it, they pulled the lens cap off and left one piece of tape hanging off the lens, and then when the lens was hot the tape managed to float up and touch the lens, and when pulled away a residue was left. I already talked to Mike about it and he sent me cleaning instructions, which I was able to use for a bit of the adhesive in the way of the light path, the rest is out of the light path so I will tackle that at a later date. It's messy to try to get it off as it streaks really easily.

The second thing I noticed that made me less than happy was as I moved the projector, or just bumped it or wiggled the shelf it is on, something is rattling inside the projector. Not like it is loose and bouncing around inside, just like a ribbon cable or something is floating next to the chassis and when I tap the case or bump the shelf, it rattles for a second. I honestly haven't heard that from my seating positions, and I will hear even less once I get the box fully enclosed, but it was a little discouraging. If stuff is that loose inside, it's no wonder there is so many freight issues. I took a video of it but unless someone really wants to hear it, I'm not going to post it. It doesn't seem to affect anything. I do have over 20kw of power, so I was concerned that whatever is rattling will be going nuts on heavy bass scenes, and if it becomes a bigger problem I will deal with it.

Convergence was decent, red and blue off by one pixel, and after correction red is still off a bit on the left, and the blue just a bit on the far right, but overall pretty clean. Not enough to warrant zone convergence, and of course not enough to see any issues in the image.

Initial setup was fairly easy, my install is on a shelf mount, and squaring it up was not terribly difficult. I have a rather large screen (150" wide 2.39:1), and based on the grid pattern, the middle of the screen frame appears to be sagging by a millimeter or two, so if I line up the bottom line with the edge of the screen, it drops off the screen on the corners, and the opposite at the top. I am sure it is sag in the screen, as I don't think it's possible for the image to be arched, lol..

I first got it set up for regular 16:9 since that is easiest (just align top and bottom and square it all up). And then I tested a few various sources real quick. Initial impression was good, with the lower black floor immediately noticeable compared to my Epson. Noticeable but not revolutionary, but I think that is always the case once you get to this level, I never expected more than incremental changes, and I don't feel like I got anything more. Yes, image is sharper, focus is better, color is better right out of the box, contrast in darker scenes is noticeably better, and of course, having 18gbps is an immense relief. I set the Shield at 4k 422 12 bit 60p and now I just forget it. Every source switches automatically to the desired color depth, frame rate, and chroma subsampling rate. PSVue was always a pain because it is at 10 bit color, 60hz, so on a 10gbps HDMI, I had to constantly switch between 1080p 60p 10bit and then back to 4k 10bit 30p for 4k content.

Then I got the image zoomed in for scope, and hit my first "wtf?" Using the zoom/shift grid, I zoomed it out to fit, but I hit the limits of the lens about a half inch short of getting the lines at the edges of my screen. I remeasured and my lens to screen is 17'8" or 212". My screen width is 150". That's 1.4133, and the projector should do lower than 1.4 (I think 1.36 or 1.38 is the min throw). But then I realized that the lines must be set up for 2.35:1, and I have a 2.39:1 screen. I had mine custom cut since most movies these days are 2.39:1 but screens are usually 2.35:1. That is a difference of over an inch in height at my width. So instead of zooming and shifting with the grid, I put a scope movie on and sure enough, I was throwing over the edges of the screen by 2+ inches all the way around. So I was zooming just a little too much despite the grid being inside the frame. Mystery solved.

Before throwing the projector up on the shelf (no easy task since my shoulders both have issues, lol) I mounted the big steel plate on the bottom for the Paladin DCR lens. I used the recommended holes for JVC and the longer screws (4mmx25mm) just barely fit, despite the instructions saying to use the 18mm length screws. Once the zoom was set for scope, and it was all converged and ready to go, I popped the lens on to see where we were at. And 4" on each side was occluded by the lens frame! Again, the rating is 1.4 min for the paladin DCR, so WTF was going on??

Well, after some tinkering, I realized that the bracket was too high and too far forward and the back of the Paladin was quite a ways away from the JVC lens. So I pulled the projector forward and tried to lower it with some spacers. Unfortunately, that meant getting longer screws, so I hit the hardware store for some 4mmx30mm screws. Then I used the next set of holes closer to the front, which are labeled for use with Epson in the Panamorph instructions, but made the bracket sit back almost 1/2" further. So with the bracket lower and further back, I next changed up the bracket mount to slide under the bracket instead of over it. The thumb screws would be hidden by the lens once mounted, but I am not taking it off for 16:9, so no big deal.

Then I scooted the projector back about 6 inches to get a little narrower beam of light as an added precaution. This meant going through and realigning everything, but once it was done I was able to get the lens lined up nicely, and it is just barely on the edge of some occlusion in one corner, which would be avoidable if the mount could be lower and slightly back from where it is now. But it worked, so I am satisfied. I overzoomed by a couple more clicks to hide the barrel effect from the lens, which was minimal (maybe a quarter inch at the corners compared to the middle, over a 150" width).

Once that was all done, I settled in to get it dialed in and tested.

At first, HDR was NOT cooperating very well. It was washed out and looked horrible, or far too dark to be watchable. This was discouraging but I remembered some others reporting the same thing, so I dug in and tried to find the posts here. Unfortunately, this thread is over 300 pages and even with searching, I just couldn't find what I was looking for. I did some searching on the "other forums" and found some helpful advice, and then sat back down (it was after 10pm now, lol) and figured it out.

I ended up changing the gamma mode to HDR(PQ) and then found where I could turn on the tone mapping. At first when I turned on that gamma mode it was horribly dark, and completely unwatchable. But once I found that switch for tone mapping, it was suddenly as bright as if I set it to gamma 2.4 but with the contrast and color I expected (not washed out). I don't know why this isn't on by default, and why it is so hard to find (not even grayed out if not in the right mode). Now that it looked more like I was expecting, I fired up a couple HDR movies with metadata and settled on I think +3 for tone mapping, and like +1 for light and maybe +1 for tone control (or whatever it is called), I can't remember exactly, but it looked really good. Deep blacks, great color, and not dark at all (except when it was supposed to be). I am probably missing a little bit of the black floor because I have to compensate for the larger screen, but even so I fired up Interstellar and the space scenes were still "blacker" than the Epson.

Then I did some movies without metadata, and set the manual tone mapping to +13, and I think 3 on the tone control, and -2 on black (I tweaked it a few times) and watched a little bit of Avengers Infinity War and it looked pretty spectacular. I then fired up Star Trek (I think the 3rd in the reboot series?) and again, it looked excellent!

Then out of curiosity, I turned on the BT2020 color mode with the color filter. On the Epson this was a 20-25% loss in light, and completely made HDR unwatchable on my screen. I had gained some light with the Paladin DCR lens, and didn't want to give up even one lumen, so I was fully expecting to just turn it back off. But holy cow, I barely noticed it get darker! I mean, some people measured 10% drop, but I was skeptical. 10% is barely noticeable, as long as you have enough light to begin with. I heard the filter move into place, and the color improved just a bit, but it was still an excellent image in terms of the amount of light. So I tried it on a few different UHD movies and I have to say, I really love it.

I almost went to bed feeling a bit disappointed in the HDR performance, but pushing through and finding the right settings and playing around got me to the point where I am excited to watch more. Is it worth the price? That is subjective of course. It is finally where I wanted my video to be, and while I could always use more light due to the large screen, I am confident I won't be struggling on HDR movies any more. For me that was worth the price. The increase in light and resolution on scope format with the lens is noticeable, but again, like everything else, not revolutionary. I am sure in the coming weeks I will hit some content that makes me go "Wow!", but in initial testing I am just simply satisfied.

ETA: One more thing I forgot... Holy bright corners! I have always read about JVC's bright corners and thought it was something that you can only see under very specific circumstances (similar to pixel peeping), but the first time I settled in to watch some content with the lights off, the black screen before content starts showed off this flaw as clear as day. I don't particularly care, I understand it is due to the lens design, and I don't notice it in regular content, but wow, it was far more noticeable than I expected. I just wanted to throw that in for completeness.

Last edited by dkersten; 04-12-2019 at 08:51 AM.
dkersten is offline  
post #9489 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 08:57 AM
Member
 
goosecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Spoiler!


Your interior JVC box looks great which is reassuring.

But looking at those pictures, I see a couple reasons why double-boxing might actually increase the risk of shipping damage.
-The outer box does not have cut-out handles like the JVC box does. Those handles can really help with carrying a big, awkward box without it slipping out of your hands.
-The JVC box labeling is highly professional looking and clearly shows that there is a nice, new, electronics device inside. On the other hand, the plain outer box is how I might ship a bunch of old books and clothes. Many (most?) people will handle the JVC box more carefully simply because of how it is presented - it's human nature. Slapping a generic "fragile" label on the outer box might help but wouldn't come close to matching the professional look of the JVC factory box.

There are pros/cons either way. Just pointing out that the pros of double-boxing may not be worth the cons.
Chris Kane, skypop and coxy2416 like this.
goosecat is online now  
post #9490 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
jbrinegar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 609
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 253
Can anyone that has done any calibrating on their units (JVCrs2000) comment on their rec 709 gamut coverage? I did a quick auto cal with my lumagen/chromapure/i1display pro and only got 90%. Looks like my green is pretty undersaturated. Anyone else have this?

JVC RS2000
Anthem mrx1120//Lumagen Radiance Pro
Klipsch Ref series 7.2.4 setup
Panasonic UB820 //Xbox one X //PS4 Pro // Apple 4k TV
Stewart Filmscreen 135" Cima Neve
jbrinegar is online now  
post #9491 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,011
Mentioned: 307 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5360 Post(s)
Liked: 5412
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrinegar View Post
Can anyone that has done any calibrating on their units (JVCrs2000) comment on their rec 709 gamut coverage? I did a quick auto cal with my lumagen/chromapure/i1display pro and only got 90%. Looks like my green is pretty undersaturated. Anyone else have this?
99% of rec-709 on mine without the filter, all measurements in the new calibration thread. As you're using a 3D LUT you might want to use a rec-709-F color profile (rec-709 with the filter) as that might help.
jbrinegar likes this.

JVC Autocal Software V11 Calibration for 2019 Models (Google)
Batch Utility V4.02 May 16 2019 to automate measurements files for madVR with support for BD Folders
Manni01 is online now  
post #9492 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:50 AM
Member
 
aniv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 72
About to go pickup a UB820 to go along with my RS2000. Currently have a Oppo 103D and 203 which I will still keep as I dont want to give up the scaling feature and MKV playback option on the Oppo 203.

That being said is it a good choice vs the 9000 (considering the extra low luminance option)

and if anyone else has this UB820 and NX7 combination here, would they please share their settings?

Thanks!
aniv is offline  
post #9493 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
locutus2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 79
I have an issue with 3D movies on my N9. I use the Jvc RF emitter and PK-EM2G glasses on a Screen Innovations Black Diamond 0.8. The image is too dark i can't see a thing but i tilt my head left or right the image became brighter and watchable.
With my previous Jvc vpr and same screen 3D was perfect.
Do you know some workaround for this issue or do i have to change my screen? Maybe some compatible glasses?
Please help ... thank you.
locutus2k is offline  
post #9494 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 388 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus2k View Post
I have an issue with 3D movies on my N9. I use the Jvc RF emitter and PK-EM2G glasses on a Screen Innovations Black Diamond 0.8. The image is too dark i can't see a thing but i tilt my head left or right the image became brighter and watchable.
With my previous Jvc vpr and same screen 3D was perfect.
Do you know some workaround for this issue or do i have to change my screen? Maybe some compatible glasses?
Please help ... thank you.
Unfortunately, you need new glasses.

XPAND-X105-RF-X1

Fortunately these are available all over and are are pretty affordable.

You have right now the XPAND-X105-RF-X3 which are not the correct polarization direction for the JVC NX series.
SirMaster is online now  
post #9495 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
mattztt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Provo, UT
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by aniv View Post
About to go pickup a UB820 to go along with my RS2000. Currently have a Oppo 103D and 203 which I will still keep as I dont want to give up the scaling feature and MKV playback option on the Oppo 203.

That being said is it a good choice vs the 9000 (considering the extra low luminance option)

and if anyone else has this UB820 and NX7 combination here, would they please share their settings?

Thanks!
I splurged on the UB9000 and I'm happy with it but I think it's really hard to justify doing so. People report great results with the UB820.
aniv and Dandlj like this.
mattztt is offline  
post #9496 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
tommarra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 569
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 572 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkersten View Post

I almost went to bed feeling a bit disappointed in the HDR performance, but pushing through and finding the right settings and playing around got me to the point where I am excited to watch more. Is it worth the price? That is subjective of course. It is finally where I wanted my video to be, and while I could always use more light due to the large screen, I am confident I won't be struggling on HDR movies any more. For me that was worth the price. The increase in light and resolution on scope format with the lens is noticeable, but again, like everything else, not revolutionary. I am sure in the coming weeks I will hit some content that makes me go "Wow!", but in initial testing I am just simply satisfied.

ETA: One more thing I forgot... Holy bright corners! I have always read about JVC's bright corners and thought it was something that you can only see under very specific circumstances (similar to pixel peeping), but the first time I settled in to watch some content with the lights off, the black screen before content starts showed off this flaw as clear as day. I don't particularly care, I understand it is due to the lens design, and I don't notice it in regular content, but wow, it was far more noticeable than I expected. I just wanted to throw that in for completeness.
Congrats.

For me HDR took bit of working as well ... but really the only way to watch HDR on these PJ is to use MadVR or something equivalent to dynamic tone mapping. I thought the fixed tonemapping was okay, but the image always looked a little flat, but with MadVR it just pops so much more.


For my NX7 - I dont really see any bright corners, so could be an inter unit variance

I realized after about 10 days of tinkering, to stop messing with any settings and just enjoy the really good image this sends out.

My wife the other day mentioned that our home theatre has better sounds and video than our local Movie theatre ... and she never notices these things. These new PJs are really good.
Dandlj likes this.

Gear: Fronts: B&W 803D3 | Center: B&W HTM2D3 | Surrounds: B&W 705S2 | Backs: B&W DM601S3 | Heights: Definitive Techonlogy ProCinema 1000 | Receiver & Amps: Anthem MRX 720 + Emotiva BasX-5 | Projector: JVC NX7 | Source: HTPC with Nvidia 2070, Kodi + External Player: MPC-HC with MadVR (for Blu-ray rips), Nvidia Shield (for streaming content)
tommarra is offline  
post #9497 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
locutus2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
Unfortunately, you need new glasses.

XPAND-X105-RF-X1

Fortunately these are available all over and are are pretty affordable.

You have right now the XPAND-X105-RF-X3 which are not the correct polarization direction for the JVC NX series.
No i have the Original Jvc PK-EM2G glasses, not the expand ... is it possible that Jvc is selling glasses that are nbot compatibile with their projectors?
locutus2k is offline  
post #9498 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 09:59 AM
Member
 
aniv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattztt View Post
I splurged on the UB9000 and I'm happy with it but I think it's really hard to justify doing so. People report great results with the UB820.
I have really no issues with splurging lol. However I am a very impatient man as some might say; The UB820 is available at Best Buy today, so need to have it today so I can check out the Winter Soldier and Civil Wark 4K discs on the 23rd. Dont want to be on a wait list for the 9000 unless I really need to.

Surprisingly the Captain America 4K disc had the tone mapping data required but not sure its correct or not. It looked as a minimal upgrade from an upscaled bluray.
aniv is offline  
post #9499 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 388 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus2k View Post
No i have the Original Jvc PK-EM2G glasses, not the expand ... is it possible that Jvc is selling glasses that are nbot compatibile with their projectors?


Oh my bad for assuming you had Xpand.

Yes JVC is advertising the wrong glasses.

It’s confirmed that the NX have changed the polarization by 90 degrees compared to the previous X/RS projectors, yet JVC is advertising the same glasses for both lines of projectors.
SirMaster is online now  
post #9500 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
No because you are changing the perceived image size based on your distance from it. Setting your immersion based on the height of the 1.78:1 screen means wider films will be much less immersive than intended, as they fill less and less of the frame the wider you get.
No... You're not changing the image size at all so the seating distance doesn't change. If you watch 2.39:1 content on a 96" wide screen, it doesn't matter if the screen itself is 2.39:1 or 16:9. The image size is the same (At least in the example you described previously).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
The vertical constraint, in most cases, only exists if you are fixated on how much surface area you can cover.
No... The vertical constraint always exists unless you put your projector screen outside where there is no ceiling. Whether you hit the vertical constraint or the horizontal constraint first depends on the AR of the screen that you select and the AR of the available space you have on your wall. For example, look at this image:


http://www.screenexcellence.com/images/se_video_3.jpg

That guy clearly hit the vertical constraint first. He still has lots of space to the left and right of his screen. Assume that the person who owns that home theater watches 95% TV and sports content that is usually 16:9. Would you seriously recommend they get a 16:9 screen in that room? Absolutely not. As far as seating distance is concerned, they can decide what is comfortable and make whatever adjustments they need.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
I care about screen size to the extent I will size it appropriately to the desired AR and seating distance (and other factors like brightness). Your situation doesn't really fit the norm as most people aren't going to be comfortable with nearly that level of immersion. And that's totally fine. Our rooms are our space to make what we want of them. The most important thing is that you are happy with what you have.
I think we must be talking past each other. I'm not saying my situation applies to anybody else. I'm just recommending that people consider the limits of their available wall space and then narrow their options based on various constraints. Here, maybe this will help communicate what I'm talking about:

Stewart motorized horizontal masking screen: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sta...(horizontal-em)

Stuart motorized vertical masking screen: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sta...m-(vertical-em)

Those screens are designed to do exactly what I'm talking about. You pick a screen based on the size and shape of your available wall space. Then, depending on the content you are watching, you adjust the masks. That way you maximize your image size to fit your available wall space.

I'm totally on board with people being happy with what they have. That's why I recommend they get something they will be happy with. Nobody has ever been unhappy because their screen was the proper aspect ratio to fit their wall space nicely. People don't have to heed my advice if they don't want to. It's fine.

I think I've made my point clear. I'm not sure how to communicate it more effectively. I'm yielding the floor on this specific issue, but I thank you for challenging me to better understand my own philosophy.
wombats is offline  
post #9501 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
mattztt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Provo, UT
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus2k View Post
No i have the Original Jvc PK-EM2G glasses, not the expand ... is it possible that Jvc is selling glasses that are nbot compatibile with their projectors?
Yes, unfortunately it appears that there is some internal confusion around this and JVC has been recommending glasses that are not a good match for the projector.
mattztt is offline  
post #9502 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:12 AM
Advanced Member
 
mattztt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Provo, UT
Posts: 633
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
You pick a screen based on the size and shape of your available wall space. Then, depending on the content you are watching, you adjust the masks. That way you maximize your image size to fit your available wall space.
Most folks go one of two ways:
2.35:1 screen: Watching scope content that fills the screen, 16:9 content in the horizontal center of that space with black bars on left and right
16:9 screen: Watching 16:9 content that fills the screen, 2.35:1 content in the vertical center of that space with black bars on top and bottom

Assuming that your seating is stationary only the first of those two options preserves acceptable immersion for both aspect ratios. The second produces a 2.35:1 image that is like sitting in the back row of the theater. I think this is what jeahrens is concerned that you are going to end up with.

Of course the people here aren't "most folks", with 4-way masking and even articulated chairs that automatically move forward and backward being options that actual forum members have implemented. If you are in fact planning to zoom the 16:9 content so that you have "black bars" (masking) on all four sides and then watch 2:35.1 content that is the same height as that, with seating placed to optimize immersion for that, then I think you've actually got an ideal configuration. You could then open the masks fully for IMAX content with extra immersion. The only thing CIH folks tend to push back against is sitting at a position that optimizes immersion for a 16:9 image and then viewing undersized letterboxed 2.35:1 content from that same position.
mattztt is offline  
post #9503 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
locutus2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattztt View Post
Yes, unfortunately it appears that there is some internal confusion around this and JVC has been recommending glasses that are not a good match for the projector.
So to workaround the issue what should i get? XPAND-X105-RF-X1 are working for the series N? Do they work with the Jvc RF emitter?
Thank you
locutus2k is offline  
post #9504 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:36 AM
Member
 
aniv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattztt View Post
I splurged on the UB9000 and I'm happy with it but I think it's really hard to justify doing so. People report great results with the UB820.
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus2k View Post
So to workaround the issue what should i get? XPAND-X105-RF-X1 are working for the series N? Do they work with the Jvc RF emitter?
Thank you
Yes I have the JVC RF emitter and the XPAND X1 you referenced. Works perfect.
aniv is offline  
post #9505 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1808 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
No... You're not changing the image size at all so the seating distance doesn't change. If you watch 2.39:1 content on a 96" wide screen, it doesn't matter if the screen itself is 2.39:1 or 16:9. The image size is the same (At least in the example you described previously).
You're not changing the physical dimensions of the scope image. You are changing the seating distance based on the height of the screen. You're not grasping the concept that changing your seating distance allows you preserve the impact of narrower content and allow wider content to fill much more of your field of view.

Just so we're clear, this isn't meant to apply to your scenario where you are essentially as close to the screen as humanly possible, it's meant to help screen selection for normal seating and rooms.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
No... The vertical constraint always exists unless you put your projector screen outside where there is no ceiling. Whether you hit the vertical constraint or the horizontal constraint first depends on the AR of the screen that you select and the AR of the available space you have on your wall. For example, look at this image:

That guy clearly hit the vertical constraint first. He still has lots of space to the left and right of his screen. Assume that the person who owns that home theater watches 95% TV and sports content that is usually 16:9. Would you seriously recommend they get a 16:9 screen in that room? Absolutely not. As far as seating distance is concerned, they can decide what is comfortable and make whatever adjustments they need.
As I put in the very first post on this I acknowledge there are rooms that will be problematic and can dictate what is possible. However in most rooms this is not the case. If the case above primarily watches TV and sports I'm honestly not sure the setup effort for a wider AR would be worth it for the 5% of the time they would use it.

Most room "constraints" I see are people concerned with filling their space with the biggest screen they can and not thinking about whether this is the best solution for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
I think we must be talking past each other. I'm not saying my situation applies to anybody else. I'm just recommending that people consider the limits of their available wall space and then narrow their options based on various constraints. Here, maybe this will help communicate what I'm talking about:

Those screens are designed to do exactly what I'm talking about. You pick a screen based on the size and shape of your available wall space. Then, depending on the content you are watching, you adjust the masks. That way you maximize your image size to fit your available wall space.
I know what masking does. Masking does nothing to alleviate that a narrow AR screen is decreasing the intended immersion of wider AR material. It helps with perceived contrast and looks quite nice. However The Breakfast Club still has more visual impact than Lord of the Rings. Which is the reverse of the respective Director's intentions.

Starting out looking at the wall and not at what your goals and use case are is backwards. I don't care that I could put a taller 1.78:1 screen in my room than the scope screen I have. I would sit further back from it (I'm already at my desired vertical immersion). 16:9 would be perceived the same size. All wider formats would now be perceived smaller. It would be zero benefit and only negatives for my use case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
I'm totally on board with people being happy with what they have. That's why I recommend they get something they will be happy with. Nobody has ever been unhappy because their screen was the proper aspect ratio to fit their wall space nicely. People don't have to heed my advice if they don't want to. It's fine.

I think I've made my point clear. I'm not sure how to communicate it more effectively. I'm yielding the floor on this specific issue, but I thank you for challenging me to better understand my own philosophy.
You've made your points just fine. This isn't a person A being right and person B being wrong discussion. I started with a 16:9 screen and was very happy initially. Had it for years. However some of my very favorite films are scope (most new films I end up buying still are). I know in the premium theaters they aren't letterboxed which led me to research how I could achieve this at home.

The goal of a scope screen should not be about making 1.85:1 films less immersive. There are plenty out there, like Aliens or The Avengers, I love. The goal should be about recreating the theatrical experience of wider AR films actually being wider and not shrinking them to be less and less immersive.

The concept of moving your seating distance in accordance with your desired vertical image size can be hard to wrap your head around. So I go back to the example of sitting the front row of a theater vs. the back and just how much that changes your perception of the image size. In many cases you can use your desired vertical immersion to seating distance ratio to achieve the AR you ultimately want.

Again you're explaining yourself just fine. I appreciate the civil discussion. I know right off that you aren't going to be someone that can really benefit from this due to your current seating and screen relationship. This is mainly to explain why and how another AR may be a better choice despite not filling the wall with screen.

jeahrens is offline  
post #9506 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 10:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
tommarra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 569
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 572 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Official JVC RS3000/NX9 - JVC RS2000/NX7/N7 - JVC RS1000/NX5/N5 - Owners Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by wombats View Post
No... You're not changing the image size at all so the seating distance doesn't change. If you watch 2.39:1 content on a 96" wide screen, it doesn't matter if the screen itself is 2.39:1 or 16:9. The image size is the same (At least in the example you described previously).







No... The vertical constraint always exists unless you put your projector screen outside where there is no ceiling. Whether you hit the vertical constraint or the horizontal constraint first depends on the AR of the screen that you select and the AR of the available space you have on your wall. For example, look at this image:





http://www.screenexcellence.com/images/se_video_3.jpg



That guy clearly hit the vertical constraint first. He still has lots of space to the left and right of his screen. Assume that the person who owns that home theater watches 95% TV and sports content that is usually 16:9. Would you seriously recommend they get a 16:9 screen in that room? Absolutely not. As far as seating distance is concerned, they can decide what is comfortable and make whatever adjustments they need.







I think we must be talking past each other. I'm not saying my situation applies to anybody else. I'm just recommending that people consider the limits of their available wall space and then narrow their options based on various constraints. Here, maybe this will help communicate what I'm talking about:



Stewart motorized horizontal masking screen: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sta...(horizontal-em)



Stuart motorized vertical masking screen: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sta...m-(vertical-em)



Those screens are designed to do exactly what I'm talking about. You pick a screen based on the size and shape of your available wall space. Then, depending on the content you are watching, you adjust the masks. That way you maximize your image size to fit your available wall space.



I'm totally on board with people being happy with what they have. That's why I recommend they get something they will be happy with. Nobody has ever been unhappy because their screen was the proper aspect ratio to fit their wall space nicely. People don't have to heed my advice if they don't want to. It's fine.



I think I've made my point clear. I'm not sure how to communicate it more effectively. I'm yielding the floor on this specific issue, but I thank you for challenging me to better understand my own philosophy.


This has been discussed so often.

Get the larges possible screen you can get for the space.

You can always get Masking to get the right aspect ration, plus move the seating or have multiple seats to get the optimal viewing immersion.


Screen is one of the most important and expensive item - so just get the best / biggest possible you can.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
wombats likes this.

Gear: Fronts: B&W 803D3 | Center: B&W HTM2D3 | Surrounds: B&W 705S2 | Backs: B&W DM601S3 | Heights: Definitive Techonlogy ProCinema 1000 | Receiver & Amps: Anthem MRX 720 + Emotiva BasX-5 | Projector: JVC NX7 | Source: HTPC with Nvidia 2070, Kodi + External Player: MPC-HC with MadVR (for Blu-ray rips), Nvidia Shield (for streaming content)
tommarra is offline  
post #9507 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 11:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
locutus2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattztt View Post
I splurged on the UB9000 and I'm happy with it but I think it's really hard to justify doing so. People report great results with the UB820.
The Panasonic are excellent disc players and bad network players. I have the 9000 and the N9. I must confess that unless i am missing something in the config of the vpr/player the new Pana profiles for the Jvc are not good at all to my eyes: too dark and with colours boosted too much. I hope i'm doing something wrong otherwise they're useless. But the Pana HDR optimizer does wonders, no doubt.
locutus2k is offline  
post #9508 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 11:04 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 24,000
Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6393 Post(s)
Liked: 6393
Quote:
Originally Posted by john.odonnell01 View Post
That kind of puts me in a spot. The next closest dealer is over 100 miles away. I guess I could call them and see what they would do. Thanks for the feedback smitty. Since I am still looking at upwards of $14k to spend. This might sway them..
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty View Post
I had a similar experience with a local dealer. He kept pushing the Sony 695 and took me to the back of his shop to show me some JVC's some people has supposedly returned. The 695 he had set up in his store did not look good at all (which suggests that perhaps he didn't know what he was doing or didn't care about proper setup). Looking back on the experience, I am so glad I didn't give his advice much credence and instead went with the RS2000, as the unit I have throws an awesome picture.
That is kinda crazy, if the dealer carries both, would he not want to help the customer choose what is best for his needs?
john.odonnell01 likes this.
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
post #9509 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 11:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mickey79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,295
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Is there anybody here projecting on a 150" screen with an NX5? I've been hearing some conflicting reports and I'm trying to make a decision. Does this projector work well for 4K HDR & 3D on a 150" screen with 1.0 Gain?

Thanks.

7.1.4: Polk RTi12 Fronts, RTi8 Surrounds, Monitor70 Surround Backs, CSi A6 Center, Klipsch R-14M Front Height & Rear Height + Outlaw LFM-1 EX Subwoofer.
JVC NX5 True 4K HDR Projector / Denon X6300H AVR
Intel Broadwell-E 6 Core (H2O) / EVGA RTX 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra Hybrid (H2O) HTPC
LG UBK80 UHD Blu-ray / XBOX One X
mickey79 is offline  
post #9510 of 14000 Old 04-12-2019, 11:36 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1808 Post(s)
Liked: 1134
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey79 View Post
Is there anybody here projecting on a 150" screen with an NX5? I've been hearing some conflicting reports and I'm trying to make a decision. Does this projector work well for 4K HDR & 3D on a 150" screen with 1.0 Gain?

Thanks.
Well the smaller the screen size the more "pop" the image has. But it should work fine. Just be prepared to do a little tweaking of the tonemapping to get HDR to look good.

jeahrens 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