AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 119 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
NOTE: The following report contains dual screenshots of two projectors. One has approximately 10% higher light output. A single autoexposure camera was used which means that that: A) there is an exposure error of 5% on both projectors. B) This makes the whites look whiter on one, and grey on the other. C) Colors and their relative values are shifted to more intense on the dimmer projector and less intense on the brighter one in darker scenes, and vice-versa in lighter scenes. D) Contrast ratio on the brighter projector appears wider than it is because the camera drops off low values; plus the dimmer projector has its grey scale compressed which makes smaller steps.


The viewer is cautioned to look past these image issues which were retained unmodified to show particular image qualities of the two projectors. To the human eye, and especially individually, the projectors look much closer to one another. Please also be aware that the camera used was a $400 Fuji 2800 Finepix. Judging $15,000 projectors with images from this camera is like judging Martin Logan speakers by listening to a cassette tape of them.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I spent all night with my brother and friend comparing a SIM2 HT300 to my Marantz VP12s1. Comparison was done by HTPC to VGA only. We used a Sony VAIO 500 PIII, WinXP Pro, ATI Radeon 8500, Powerstrip @1280x720, TheaterTek. Both projectors and a 19†monitor were fed from a powered 4-way VGA splitter/amplifier with identical VGA cables.



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Asetup.jpg

(I must apologize for these photos, shot with my Fuji 2800. I didn’t even use my tripod sometimes; it was fairly busy just setting all this up and we didn’t take much time for photos. Non linear color and pushes and lost shadow detail were its fault.)



We set up on my friend's 8' high 4:3 screen, which is white with a small gain. Both projectors were shooting an 89" diagonal (44x78) image. The HT300 was on the top half, and the Marantz on the bottom.



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Amike.jpg

(This is my friend Mike (& cat). He’s built home theaters for many years, and was one of Runco’s first dealers. He’s been a sports photographer and lab technician for pro photo labs. My brother Carl was with us, he does digital astrophotography and builds telescopes and camera mounts. I’ve also done photography and a lot of computer imagery for print and digital video, plus I’ve had projectors since the Kloss Novabeam.)



The Marantz was the winner in almost every aspect of image, mechanics, and operation, except for computer connection and user tweakability. With the best CONSUMER AVAILABLE adjustments dialed in on both, there was absolutely no question about which projector was 'better' out of the box.


I would characterize the Marantz as a reference, transparent, and uncolored. Just like the best reference monitor speakers allow you to hear through to the source, the Marantz lets you see through to the source.


With access to the HT300 SERVICE menu, it might be possible to get maybe 5-10% more punch out of it and better color accuracy. This would put it close to the Marantz. I know there was an HT300 upgrade that made more brightness, and am not sure if the one we used had the newest upgrade. It was ordered very recently and delivered this week, so I assume it was the latest.


The SIM2’s primary problem is its bulb. The designers might have compromised to get a 6000 hour bulb. No matter what you do, it will never be as hot and clean as the Marantz. However once you watch a few DVDs, you find the image qualities that people PREFER have been catered to. Although it is not a reference, it is a careful design to produce pleasing images and improve the weaknesses of video source. It functions beautifully within an envelope, and only pushed outside that envelope it gets weak.


LENSES:


The lens on the Marantz is sharper and has less aberration (smaller color fringes at the edges of the picture.) The SIM2 lens has a HUGE zoom compared to the Marantz. The mechanical focus and zoom on the Marantz is preferable to me over the SIM2 powered ones. It takes a few back and forth overshoots to get them set on the SIM2, but the Marantz feels like adjusting a quality 35mm lens.


CASE DESIGN:


The big Marantz double hull leaks neither light nor sound. The SIM2 has forward louvered vents on the 'top', and is as open as a business projector on the bottom. There is a lot of light spill. A fan is mounted almost in view. You can hear color wheel whine and fan whir clearly. You can barely detect the Marantz, and then only a low air sound. SIM2 designed a gorgeous, sexy sculpture but to do its job it will need to be in an ugly hush box or the next room behind glass! The much larger Marantz is actually flatter and less obtrusive on a ceiling. The Marantz is also more stylish than it appears in pictures. It is very neo-Tokyo, like lab gear from Akira.


I saw a picture of the SIM2 on some fancy looking custom floor mount; maybe SIM2 could also design a skirt for ceiling mount that redirects the air and muffles the sound and light spill.


CONTROLS:


Neither projector has a very good remote. The HT300 has numeric choices for sources, and the Marantz buttons are clustered in groups that are hard to memorize. The Marantz does have better direct button access to most things, while the HT300 relies more on menus.


Both devices have cycling menus that will limit their ability to be controlled by computer through IR. When the menu is brought up, it goes back to where it was last time. You can’t just jump to the top since it cycles. Thus, without human eyes reading the screen, there is no way to know where it is in the menu!


The HT300 has custom color temp via RGB ‘level’ adjustment. It also has a pixel clock adjust (FREQ). The Marantz lacks both of these. The HT300 has a service menu with (supposedly) some G2 and limiter adjustments for each primary, but we didn’t have the service menu available. The Marantz does not have these controls either. They are justifiably smug about their calibration, and the various settings are subtle variations on that perfection.


COMPUTER:


We did not compare the video decoders and processors with component or s-video; they are basically the same Faroudja units.


The COMPUTER in the SIM2 seems more robust. We hooked it up by itself, and it synched immediately to the same Powerstrip settings I'd struggled to make work on the Marantz. And its 'FREQ' adjustment lets you set the *exact* horizontal frequency. It initially synched at 1645 which produced the same 80-pixel wide uncertain dither area as the Marantz. Set to 1648 manually--the actual Powerstrip setting--and the dither DISAPPEARED completely. It was NOT perfect, however. The pixel columns at the extreme edges were shakier than the synched Marantz.


Once the VGA splitter was hooked up, it added some 'ringing' on either side of the grid pattern we were using, so it was pointless to try to deal with the shakiness.


The Marantz has no 'FREQ', ie, pixel clock adjustment. It appears to synch very close to the total, just like the SIM2, but does not allow you to click those extra few notches to perfection. Marantz should absolutely add this adjustment to future projectors. NOTE: My Marantz is a February 2002 unit, and apparently there has been an upgrade since to make it synch better.


The Marantz has diagonal interference lines related to some resonance between the video card clock and its own clock, or some EMI that is independent of cable type or length. You can only see them when you walk up and look closely.


The SIM2 has less of the diagonal interference lines. They are there, but a combination of lens softening and who knows what isolation or shielding makes them MUCH less obvious. You can’t see them from more than a foot away on the SIM2, and three feet on the Marantz. Changing the pixel frequency in Powerstrip swings these lines around on the Marantz, but does not eliminate them.


When you switch sources on the Marantz, and then go back to RGB, the screen is often shifted to the left a few pixels. An auto-adjust brings it back. On the HT300, switching away and back made the projector see 960x720 and compress the screen to 4:3. Auto adjust fixed it, too. I did not try this again to see how repeatable it was, and as I mentioned, our four-way VGA amp was not that great.


The computer on the SIM2 is also user upgradeable, whereas the Marantz is a black box in this respect.


GREYSCALE SETUP:


I used a greyscale Windows wallpaper I made to calibrate the two. It has 5% steps in the middle values and a 3% step at each end. This makes it easy to set the brighness and contrast exactly; one notch too much contrast crushes the last two whites, one notch too little brightness crushes the first two visible blacks.


For HTPC, I have my Marantz set to 95 contrast and 39 brightness. This is quite a bit wider than the typical 85 contrast, 40-41 brightness that is best with regular sources, however, it is where the Marantz resolves the most VGA whites and blacks. I stupidly forgot to record the SIM2 settings we ended up with! It resolved more blacks than the Marantz, but no matter what we did, the whites just were not there. It was not subtle at all. The highest white on the SIM2 was similar to the third grey down on the Marantz, about -15%.



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Agreys.jpg

(HT300 is on top, VP12s1 is on bottom in all photos. This was it, the best we could get, in terms of matching tint and dynamics. As you can see, the Marantz goes to eleven. Note to self: Tripod better than couch for long exposure)



The projector menu white on the SIM2 looked brighter than the pure VGA white, but yellower--almost sun colored. On the Marantz, the menu white is EXACTLY the same as the VGA white. My conclusion is that the SIM2 is overly conservative on the max RGB values allowed. Maybe this improves color tracking over the typical range of DVD values or allows more RED. If the SIM2 white was cranked up, it would go yellow. I think the 6000 hour bulb on the SIM2 is a compromise to color they should not have made. The edgy, flicker-prone 2000 hour Marantz bulb is hotter and therefore allows hotter RGB values while still tracking color.


When you have multiple screens like this, you can see an EXTREME indication of the relative color tints. With the Marantz on temp medium, and the SIM2 on low, and the monitor on 6500, they all had tints. The monitor was yellow, the Marantz pink, and the SIM2 cyan when you looked at all three at once. All three devices were tracking their tints very well. These tints are subtle. It would be almost impossible to see them one image at a time, they all have good greys.


We decided the 'pink' Marantz was closest to neutral. I adjusted out some of the yellow on the monitor to match it, and then the SIM2 just looked more cyan. I switched the temp to high on the Marantz, and suddenly it looked more like the SIM2. But I *hate* high temp on the Marantz. You generally boost blue and green to raise temp, and the image looks hotter. The Marantz appears to cut red instead, and the image goes flat at the higher temp from lost contrast range. Besides, the monitor now looked yellow again! So I left the Marantz at medium to match the monitor.


It was hard to get rid of the cyan tint on the HT300. Low temp was not low enough, so I had to do a custom one. I adjusted the 'drives' to make a user temp setting. The first thing we tried was upping the red. The last three whites went pink while the rest was still cyan! So, I cut blue and green. I ended up with red 0, green -6, and blue -7. (These settings are very grainy. Each notch changed the color too much.) Now all three images had endpoints and tints that were VERY close. There was about 10-15% more light coming from the Marantz.


So, after over an hour of staring at my grey scale, we were ready to put up some images. Mike had fled the room. Reading the relative tints and discussing them had given him a headache.


BLACKS:


The first image was a dead black screen which was very revealing. I now know one reason the Marantz ‘looks like film’. The COLOR of black on the Marantz is exactly the same color as the black of a Kodachrome positive held up to a bright light-a slightly gold-brown grey color. The color on the HT300, like on every other DLP I've seen, is lime green. The apparent brightness of both blacks is identical. But since our eyes are more sensitive to green light, the green haze is more obvious than the same amount of gold-brown haze. We also see the gold-brown in the Cinema all the time, and identify it with film. It is not a subtle difference. The Marantz black is more pleasing than the HT300 black, even though it’s the same level.


COLOR RENDITION:


To set the best color, tint, and fine tune the other settings, we put up some dynamic digital stills: mountains, trees, my kids playing. My brothers' shots are with a pretty good Olympus digital camera, and are uncompressed TIFs. He said the Marantz reproduced what he saw when he took the shots. The sky was the right color. The depth was huge. You talk about HDTV and even DVD being 3D, but those are compressed waveforms, not like these photos. Computer images can look as good as a Kodak carousel on these HD1 projectors.



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Atrees.jpg




The SIM2 was really struggling; it was out of its envelope with all the white. Also, you could 'see' the artificial green haze. The tint and colors were right, but it LOOKED like a computer image.


I put up a photo of my son in a red shirt drinking from a fountain, shot at the 'golden hour' near sunset. It looked a little flat on the Marantz at medium temp. I switched the Marantz to low temp and backed down the contrast to 90, and it was beautiful! Impossible to believe a wavy bunch of microscopic mirrors and a dremel tool spinning colored glass was making that picture! That's when we noticed the SIM2 REDS.


Every Seleco product has had an emphasis on good reds. The HT300 is no different, and seemed at first to have gone over the line. I know the color of my son's shirt. The SIM2 showed it beyond primary red lit by gold sun. It was almost magenta. We could not figure this out. We went back to the standard color temps since we had backed off blue and green. On all of them, it was too magenta. The Marantz showed the shirt a little orange, but it WAS shot at sunset-the color was very accurate. Later, we had Moulin Rouge up, and it was obvious. Just like flesh tones and sky blue, everybody recognizes the color of theater-red-velvet curtains. Moulin Rouge has a million of them, and they were all magenta on the SIM2, and uh, velvet red on the Marantz.


We played with the reds a lot, but they were always too powerful when everything else was right. I think this weakened the blue, too. Finally, we returned the Marantz to medium and matched the two as best as possible except for red. (Remember, in spite of the extra drive controls on the HT300, we did NOT have access to the service menu which supposedly has a G2-like control and limiter control for each primary.)


We adjusted the color for maximum punch without getting silly; just like most people like it.


MOVIES, FINALLY:


Watching DVDs, except for the overdone reds, both projectors were beautiful. The differences I have been discussing are so subtle they mostly show on very critical still images where the viewer shot the image and knows what it should look like. The HT300 was not as bright as the Marantz, but the image was just as involving, and after a while the reason for the magenta red started to show up. We were watching the shower scene in Starship Troopers over and over and the extra red in the HT300 made the flesh tones more 'alive'. They looked more like blood was flowing through them. This beautiful flesh color was evident on every scene we tried.


http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Addog.jpg

(Note her cheeks and lips. The color of the wall and other things is very good and matches well on both PJs, but the top (HT300) girl looks more alive. This is kind of like the fat midbass put in speakers to make people like them. It is NOT as accurate as a reference monitor, but it is PLEASING! Oh, yeah, the hideous patch of green light in the foreground is the spill from the HT300)


http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Acancan.jpg

(Here is where the strong HT300 reds go too far. Note the right hand girl’s dress is really overloaded; it even crushes detail a bit. You can tell we were not cranking the reds up by looking at the white tuxedos. If anything, the Marantz has more red in the gloves. This was a gamma choice made by SIM2-at high levels the red has run out and things go cyan.)



Of course, the film-stock black of the Marantz produces a mind-boggling film like image. Everything looked absolutely right. The hot bulb which goes to eleven and DID NOT FLICKER ONCE provided a punch that really popped the image.



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Aspace.jpg

(This is POP. Let me explain. Look at the blue spaceship in the middle right. On the HT300, it is blue in color. On the Marantz, it is ILLUMINATED by the plasma balls from the surface. See? Even more subtle, compare the planet surface, where the Marantz makes it obvious the plasma balls are lighting the clouds, but the HT300 only shows a dark blue surface. The hot HT300 red gives the explosion an orange fringe that is kind of nice; adding more dynamism and life as it does with flesh tones. To get the same pop from the Seleco you could use a smaller screen size.)



http://www.micandles.com/AVS/Abugs.jpg

(Here is a saturated bright scene. This is where the HT300 runs out of gas, as with the very difficult digital photos and Windows white. Notice that there is still GOOD delineation in cloud details. It is just a little weaker and the Marantz blue is STRONG. The color variation on the direct view monitor in these photos is because of my digital camera. Live, the tones were the same, just brighter.)



After hours of movies, we all concluded that for DVD viewing, both projectors were nearly equal. The Marantz won for contrast, punch, and film appearance. The SIM2 has an edge on the flesh tones so important to everybody. But the trade-off in inaccurate true reds almost neutralized that. If only the SIM2 RGB maxes could be turned up, and the color tracking balanced for the yellowish top end, it would be a total toss-up on watching movies. Very few DVD movies get up into that last 10% of RGB values that the Marantz totally owns.


CONCLUSIONS:


Seleco should give up on the sexy little curvy artsy look and follow Sharp and Marantz in the light-tight, quiet box design. Since the HT300 gamma program is NOT optimized to reference accuracy, they should allow access to the service menu for people that want that. I know Andrea in this forum has made an HT300 track 6500 with incredible accuracy. I bet that projector looks very different from this one. But it will still lack the amazing light of the Marantz.


Marantz needs to realize that their home theater projector is still a digital device from the computer arena. They should support the settings to make computer connection effortless. I would not touch their color calibration with a ten foot pole; it is perfect. But a lack of ability to adjust synch for perfect pixel alignment—which exists on the HT300 AND the Sharp 9000—is a big issue. (The HT300 is not perfect either, with its jumping to 4:3 and shaky edges. The SHARP 9000 was recalled to be programmed for perfect 1280x720. I saw it in action on HTPC, and it had no mis-synching or shakiness at all!)


Actually, both projectors could benefit from adding computer oriented features. The Sharp owner I met said his comes with a disc of software with programmable gamma tables and so on!


Everybody that sees these two projectors will love them, and if they have not seen HD1 DLP before, they will be floored. The HT300 has a few more controls if you like to tweak it plus is user upgradeable. If you love flesh tones and fire, or have a Continental design aesthetic, or a screen smaller than 90†diagonal and perfect light control, the HT300 is a valid choice. The long life, reliable bulb might be a valid tradeoff on smaller screens, as well. If you want a projection version of a studio TV monitor that has the brightness and contrast to pop a 100â€+ picture, it’s the Marantz. With both on the same screen, most people would choose the Marantz. Most people would choose either over a CRT, too. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Wow! What a job! Thanks for sharing!


John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,020 Posts
FlatusM:


Outstanding. Thank you for the contribution. I will have a few questions about your setup later.


I would encourage you to submit some reviews to a magazine but your writing is probably far too clear, concise and straight forward. You need to start practicing writing nonsensical statements like "it just had a rightness about it that is difficult to describe" and then one of the magazines will hire you.


Thanks again - FANTASTIC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
Now THAT'S what I call a shootout!


Thanks for the info Flatus.


Q, I think he needs to be a car salesman first. This will refine his BS a little more before hitting the magazines! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,918 Posts
FlatusM- Absoulutly brilliant review of the 2 projectors. It would be interesting to know if the Seleco had the latest software to increase brightness. Could you please confirm this? If it does have the latest software and that is the increase in brightness then I prefer the brighter image of the Marantz as you mentioned. However as the Marantz has a short throw lens so far here in Australia it is not suited to my theater :( Therefore I may put both projectors on the back burner and since I have waited so long it won't be much longer to see how those HD2 projectors are. Can you please post any more pictures of the 2 in action side by side? As you said Andrea has been doing great things with the Seleco HT300 and if he lived next door to you that would of been a shoot out for all shoot outs :) I await for any followup comments you may have.


Great job,

Spero D.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
Something is not right. I don't know a great deal about these DLP's but the SIM is known to be spot on with color and contrast. For the reds to be that hot and the whites to be that yellow, something just isn't correct. No question about it, those photos speak a thousand words. Everything posted above in verifed by the photos. I just think that something is wrong with the SIM being tested. I do not own either but a very knowledgable projector "person" has told me the SIM is without peer. The greyscale is known to be spot on and those photos demonstrate something is definitely not right. Even Cliff Plavin, who has calibrated many DLP's, told me the SIM would be his first choice. Based on these photos, I think I need to reconsider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,265 Posts
Great job, thank for your review
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
Excellent write-up, FlatusM. Thanks for taking the time to do the testing and then to report on it here. While I haven't seen the HT300 in action yet, just today I had the pleasure to visit with MFE, another AVS Forum member, to see his Marantz in action. I was incredibly impressed, to say the least. We watched scenes from several DVDs and in each case I came away with not one bad thing to say. The PJ puts out a smooth, film-like image, has great/accurate colors, and is excellent with shadow details. Awesome, just awesome. What a great projector! (and the Firehawk screen wasn't too shabby, either). Thanks MFE!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
Excellant post FlatusM. BTW it is very easy to to tell which version of Sim2 software that is on the projector. Just press the Info button on the remote. It will tell you what software version you have. Version 2.05 is the version that Sim2 increased and improved the brightness. I think this information would be key in verifying the results that you posted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Great Post Flatus,


That's a really impressive setup you guys were in! Is that a house or a place of business? By the way how did these HD1s stack up to the mounted CRT and Runco DLP on the ceiling? Which Runco's are those?


Edward
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,247 Posts
Hi FlatusM,


First off, let me congratulate you and your colleagues on a fantastic shootout. It is rare to find such a well controlled comparison, anywhere really. It's also helpful for me to see a what kind of HTPC you are using as I am planning on going this route myself. For these reasons, it's difficult to sound a note of caution without coming off as defensive and overly prejudiced. If the Marantz is truly a better pj then I will be the first to take my hat off to it. Having said that, it would be a shame if the HT300 was being judged while performing 'under par'. I am puzzled by the apparent dimness of the Simm2 and the reported colour primaries being so 'off' cf the Marantz. High brightness has never been the goal of Simm2 who have deliberately toned down brightness in order to create a more accurate colour rendition. That the Marantz is brighter is probably not in question. On the other hand the HT300 is also fairly bright in its own right, particularly since the new software update. Your pictures suggest that the HT300 is unable to produce a correct white and even worse, a overcooked red which kind of goes right against the whole 'colour accuracy' approach taken by Simm2 and confirmed by others such as Don Stewart and Cliff Plavin. Also, the dimness of the HT300 seems to lose it definition and detail re the details at the top of the 'tree' image cf the Marantz. Maybe these are limitations of the HT300 that become apparent when making proper comparisons. However, they are not limitations I recognise on my own HT300 setup. It is possible that your model has the older software although this is less likely due to it being recently purchased. By the way, the info button is positioned directly above the blue VCR button.


I was also curious about the 'light spill' problem. Is this light spill from the lens or from the underneath of the pj? There has been a bad batch of HD1 chips, all of which are 1280 by 1024 masked off to 1280 by 720. The problem is with bad masking that causes light spill through the lens. this affected a very small number of the earlier projectors. Simm2 will, of course, swap out these faulty chips. I suspect you are referring to the light coming from underneath the pj.


Anyway, once again, thanks for the outstanding review.


Best Wishes,


Paul H
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
Really good job there, a whole lot of work, and much appreciated by many.


I agree with the others here who comment we are very surprised that the color accuracy of the Seleco you reviewed was not very good, which is surprising since color accuracy is Seleco's primary goal and a recognized strenth.


I still love my HT300, and all the features that attracted me to it initially are still there, and still missing from the Marantz; the top two being long throw distance and user upgradable software.


There is no perfect projector for everyone, that is the beauty of having such good models to select from, DLP, LCOS and LCD.


-- Cain
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,918 Posts
Quote:
I'm surprised you did not mention the flicker problem so many have had with the Marantz, and has been seen by all the folks I know who have auditioned the Marantz. Perhaps this has been fixed with the newest models??
Cain he does mention it above and it does seem the unit he used did not have the problem so maybe they have addressed it on the latest production batch-

Quote:
The edgy, flicker-prone 2000 hour Marantz bulb is hotter and therefore allows hotter RGB values while still tracking color.
and here

Quote:
The hot bulb which goes to eleven and DID NOT FLICKER ONCE provided a punch that really popped the image.
The answer I am looking for is the firmware version of that on the Seleco HT300 in the shootout. If it didn't have the newest firmware which Keith mentioned above I believe the shoot out would have to be done again. If it did have the latest firmware then the Marantz looks a lot brighter from the pictures above.


Spero D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,948 Posts
as a couple of others have noted, the apparant lack of white with the 300 is troubling. a few comments:


it appears that your photgraphs accurately substantiate your findings, however, for the comparative images you seem to have taken a single exposure with both the images from the marantz and the seleco showing. is is apparant that the marantz has a "white" that is several steps brighter than the sim "white.," this is not suprising, but what is misleading is that it seems the sim can only output a light grey at its brightest. can you adjust your camera and re-expose your shot, placing the 100 ire patch for the sim as pure white. the marantz-to-sim whites show the relative difference; we need to see the grey scale for each with the 100 ire patches set to print white.


thanks for a very thorough review.


some comments for everyone to feedback on:


several have noted that the marantz service menu adjustments are lacking, both for pixel clocking and ISF grey scale color adjustments. given that the sim service menu is useful, do you think a full ISF grey scale calibration for the sim would even out the extra red and yellow (hampering attempts at a higher brigthness white)?


given that the marantz bulb will age and the spectrum change, how important will the the lack of service menu adjustments be down the road, when the bulb output shifts to the red?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
Another question I have is for the above SIM owners. Do any of your projectors display light spill thru the case, loud fan noise and an excessively noisy color wheel, as indicated in the shootout?


I am wondering because perhaps the unit tested was somehow "defective" as another poster mentioned regarding the TI chips. If noone elses PJ has light spill or execessive noise, maybe there is something wrong with the color wheel which would effect light output, whites, greyscale and color. Just looking for some explanation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
529 Posts
The light spill and noisy color wheel were clearly evident to me at the HE Show. While the 300 looked pretty good, I thought it was a little too dim.

The 9000 displays were pretty bad, with the worst being the 6th Ave Electronics Room, the picture quality sucked. Fortunately this is not representative of the picture quality capable with the 9000. My 9000, calibrated by Cliff Plavin, and set up properly, displays an outstanding image. The Marantz looks like one hell of a projector. I had the opportunity to be at Harvey's when Dan Miller stopped in to set up a VP12 for the salesmen. It took him all of about 10 minutes, he popped in Moulin Rouge, and the picture was excellent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,948 Posts
gladiator: haven't heard from you in a while...what's up with your P-1 dvd/processor combo?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,143 Posts
Any DLP headaches with either of the units?


The Sharp does it me.


JEff
 
1 - 20 of 119 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top