AVS Forum banner

24361 - 24380 of 29257 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
That is disappointing. I would hope @madshi would be able to get you a review unit sooner rather than later as critical analysis by a respected reviewer can only cement the reputation of the Envy, if it is indeed as amazing as @ARROW-AV has opined. I have zero reason to doubt his endorsement as he has been highly critical of any product that fails to live up to it's own fanfare. Here's hoping you get one before summer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
How could it not be that good when the free PC version is so astoundingly good? Seemed like a slam dunk to me. They don't have a big corporation or anything involved to screw it up. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
I have no doubt that the Envy does a better job with difficult titles (like The Meg) than JVC. As I mentioned before, even the Lumagen does a noticeably better job with these scenes when compared directly (I've done this comparison for people at my house). Again, my intent is not to disparage the Envy's tone mapping, I haven't tested it so I have no idea how good it is. My complaint was the misrepresentation of the JVC in this case (and in some ways the Sony with the pics they showed before).

Until I can test the Envy, I have no idea how it stacks up to anything on the market. I've been told that evaluation units are not available and may not be available for a long time to come, so I may not have the chance to evaluate it anytime in the near future.
Yeah, I think my username was quoted by accident because I didn't post those pictures. Like you were suggesting, I was saying that I found JVC's Frame Adapt to be quite good. I also said that going from the reports here, it would appear that MadVR/Envy are improvements but I'd like to know where these improvements lay that are causing some to characterize them as "hot and cold" better than JVC's DTM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
987 Posts
Speaking as someone who has carried out some proper A-B comparisons under controlled conditions, there are indeed very significant differences between JVC DTM and the madVR Envy's DTM. The latter is significantly superior. The difference varies according to the content however there are numerous instances wherein the difference is most certainly 'night and day'. Furthermore, whilst there are some instances wherein the two look similar, there is not one single instance wherein the JVC looks better. In particular, with the madVR Envy DTM at all times the image looks correct. Whilst the JVC DTM is very good, and superior to static HDR10 HDR optimization solutions, there are many instances of chroma shifting, as well as both bright highlight detail loss, shadow detail loss, and contrast loss, which are not present with the madVR Envy DTM. When I have more time I will take some professional photography screenshots to demonstrate this (currently preparing for the Christie Eclipse demo event this weekend).



Also, with respect, we really should not be using photos taken with peoples' phones for scientific evaluation purposes.



The madVR Envy is superior to the Lumagen Pro; and the difference between the Lumagen PRO's DTM and the JVC's is less than as compared with madVR Envy's.



The fact of the matter is that not all DTM solutions are equal. Processing power has a lot to do with it. With the JVC absolutely zero new additional hardware processing power has been added. The feature was added via simple firmware update, hijacking the small amount of processing power previously utlized by the pincushion correction processing. With the Lumagen PRO, whilst the programming has been and continues to be updated, the physical hardware / electronics is locked in and not upgradable. With the madVR Envy this is using up to date specialist premium high powered PC computer components. Hence I liken the respective DTM performance capabilities to that of a pocket calculator (JVC) versus a PC computer and/or GPU of 10 years ago (Lumagen PRO) versus a PC computer and/or GPU of today (madVR Envy). Hence how this translates to actual performance.



Furthermore, it is also worth pointing out that the madVR Envy is doing stuff that neither the JVC or Lumagen PRO does, and this includes its artificial intelligence image processing, patent-pending bright highlight recovery, shadow detail recovery, and contrast recovery. Wherein, correspondingly the madVR Envy's DTM produces significantly superior detail with respect to both the bright highlights and shadow detail, as well as superior contrast and HDR luminance dynamic range accordingly as compared with both the JVC DTM and Lumagen PRO's DTM. And this is not just theoretical, it is real. I have seen this with my own eyes. Like I said, when I can find some free time I will take some photos to illustrate this :)



The bright highlight recovery in particular is standout impressive. madVR demoed this a few weeks ago at ISE 2020 in Amsterdam and with the room full of AV professionals there were literally gasps from the whole room when this feature was toggled ON and OFF, wherein the projector at the time was SONY's current flagship 5000ES projector.



Further to loss of highlight and shadow detail, the other issue that can often occur with HDR tone-mapping is chroma / hue shifting. This occurs a lot with the JVC DTM, to a much a lesser degree with the Lumagen PRO, but is entirely absent with the madVR Envy.



Furthermore, as far as upscaling is concerned there is no comparison. The madVR Envy destroys both the JVC and Lumagen PRO.



I could go on... But let's just say that speaking as someone who has essentially seen it all and experiences all things high-end AV I am very very rarely this impressed by a video device :)





Nope :)



This is a common misconception. You will still need DTM unless a video display has 4,000 - 10,000 nits peak luminance capability.



Furtheremore, there are currently numerous issues with the video walls, namely:



1) The issue of having a giant non-acoustically-transparent highly reflective panel on your front wall and all of the problems resulting from that situation, in particular with respect to audio;

2) Seamlessness

3) Visible Screen Texture

4) Achieving and maintaining perfect uniformity across the module panels over time

5) Heat Production

6) The need to purchase spare panels and replace panels over time.



...To name but a few ;)



They are also currently horrendously expensive, as in to have a decent sized screen this will currently cost you well over a million bucks :eek:



The fact of the matter is that video walls will never be a 'big nemesis' with respect to either projectors or madVR / madVR Envy. With projectors you don't have any of the above problems. Video walls will secure a niche of the market and coexist alongside both projectors and TVs. And the few individuals who do purchase a video wall will probably want to purchase a madVR Envy as well if they want to obtain the best possible video performance from their display (madVR Envy is not just DTM BTW).





Have you done an A/B comparison yet between Lumagen and MadVR Envy ?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
I was saying that I found JVC's Frame Adapt to be quite good. I also said that going from the reports here, it would appear that MadVR/Envy are improvements but I'd like to know where these improvements lay that are causing some to characterize them as "hot and cold" better than JVC's DTM.
I had been using the Panasonic UB9000 and its static tone mapping for HDR on my VW760 for quite some time. Having 185 nits available this had worked pretty well for me. So, despite of some very difficult scenes, I could easily enjoy all my movies with just 2 settings. But it took a while and before Sony provided better HDR EOTF curves I even had to use Arve curves ...

As an video enthusiast trying to get always the best possible picture I had closely monitored all the great progress on madVR (particularly last year). Therefore I had also compared madVR vs my Panasonic in my setup last summer. Then I had decided - easily - to go for the Envy / madVR. Later on I had invested a lot of time to find optimal HSTM parameter settings - so lots of pixel peeping sessions on the very high level that madVR provides. Of course I had also seen JVC' FA on several occasions both at my dealer and in the room of a friend of mine. My first impressions of the FA were also pretty good. I had then the chance to test an N5 for some time in my homecinema confirming what I had seen already from the very beginning. Many scenes looked perfectly fine using FA on the first glance. However pixel peeping you'll notice the differences to madVR with brighter pixels blown out. This you would however notice only with a trained eye or in a 1:1 comparison side by side. On the bad side I had found that I could run the N5 only in high lamp mode and used FA mostly on high (depending on the movie). But even in the same movie I had found that sometimes the picture is overexposed (too bright) or too dark. With madVR I have 1 setting and it works always for me. That is the big difference: with madVR I got a consistency that I had missed with FA. Plus on a pixel peeping level I noticed that the JVC FA couldn't compete either.

So I fully agree with what jetsen and Arrow-AV wrote about FA vs madVR. For me madVr is nothing less than the gold standard for upscaling and DTM. So in order to squeeze out the best from any projector based on what I had seen there is no better other option for me than madVR. I had tested madVR on a VW760, an N5 and a Sim2 Nero 3 plus (with only 85 nits). The results were always very impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
987 Posts
That is disappointing. I would hope @madshi would be able to get you a review unit sooner rather than later as critical analysis by a respected reviewer can only cement the reputation of the Envy, if it is indeed as amazing as @ARROW-AV has opined. I have zero reason to doubt his endorsement as he has been highly critical of any product that fails to live up to it's own fanfare. Here's hoping you get one before summer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Agreed. I am considering using an Envy over the Lumagen for my rs4500 on order. But the Lumagen is still the gold standard for video processing and i would really want to see @Kris Deering review the new kid on the block (Envy) before spending a lot of money on this.

I would hope @madshi would offer Kris a review unit ! Soon !!
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
26,611 Posts
I have no doubt that the Envy does a better job with difficult titles (like The Meg) than JVC. As I mentioned before, even the Lumagen does a noticeably better job with these scenes when compared directly (I've done this comparison for people at my house). Again, my intent is not to disparage the Envy's tone mapping, I haven't tested it so I have no idea how good it is. My complaint was the misrepresentation of the JVC in this case (and in some ways the Sony with the pics they showed before).
I would hope they do a better job as either of those units are not cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
No, the JVC was setup properly in Denver and was NEVER touched at all. I did demonstrate that one could use a different manual setting for some movies to increase the overall brightness of the image, but that may cause issues like clipping. JVC doesn't do nearly as well with the scenes you are showing here as a Lumagen, and I would expect it wouldn't perform as well as MadVR either, but it certainly performs better than your pictures show when properly setup and in the AUTO mode. Again, I think this all comes down to not knowing how to setup/calibrate the JVC properly.
Kris, as much as I appreciate you're reputation as a calibrator, I also have my own. Now I can totally understand that me being a calibrator does not necessarily mean that you trust that I know what I am doing, and I can't blame you for that, but I do want to react on the above because "not knowing how to setup/calibrate" harsh.

First, when setting up the JVC using the frame adapt function, there is not so much to calibrate and setup anymore, there is no CMS available in frame adapt, there is no means to alter the PQ curve, other than adjusting the normal contrast and brightness controls for clipping and black level.
You can calibrate grey scale, choose frame adapt, and choose if you use auto, low mid or high, frame by frame scene by scene or static.
So if you have setup the JVC, calibrated the grey scale, used frame adapt on AUTO, frame by frame and did not alter the contrast settings to manually set clipping at e certain level, then what else is there to do.

You know that when using the AUTO mode in the software, the JVC uses the metadata MaxFALL/CLL that is on the disc or source, so it uses that information to adjust its level of tone mapping, that is not the case when using the low, mid or high preset, in this case it regards the metadata of the source and uses 3 defined presets to set its level and map frame by frame to one of those 3 levels.
So in the case of The Meg, where the MaxFALL is 4000 Nits, the AUTO mode will choose a level according to that metadata, so yes there could be a difference in using low, mid high or auto because they treat the level of tone mapping different.

This also means that if the metadata on the source is wrong (which as you know is the case in a lot of content) the AUTO mode will set a level that could not be correct at all, it could go either way, but there is no way of knowing as you can't read out the actual level on the JVC.
Now I have setup the JVC, calibrated the grey scale, set the frame adapt on AUTO, used frame by frame, put the Kaleidescape directly in the JVC and dit not manually change contrast to clip at a lower or higher level.
You say that you did not alter the settings in-between the different movies, but you did not say if you have set the clipping manually with the contrast to a lower point and left it here for the viewing of the movies you mentioned.

About the horse pictures, sure that was in no way a reference, this was at ISE where they just wanted to show off the product, of course The Sony was way to high and not setup to give its best performance when it would be calibrated for best picture with its own adjustments.
We can't do anything about that, I just wanted to share that picture as a teaser, I should have know better then not to put it up here.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,171 Posts
I posted @jetsen picture of the Meg with JVC DTM and with the madVR Envy without his permission. I did not mean to start any war of words. I have apologized to him already in a PM. I was only trying to show off the Envy . I am just living vicariously in this thread and the Envy thread because they are both products on my fantasy wish list but do not have the budget. I am so glad to have this forum. I am a bit of a shutin as I suffer from PTSD, anxiety and depression. I only mention this to remind myself and all of us we never know what the other members are going through. There is a 20 year member on here in his 60s from Pittsburgh who has had to sell off most of his gear due to serious medical issues the last couple of years. I know he is heartbroken. I am trying to be a kinder gentler person going forward and reminding myself that I don't know the load the other person is carrying. Sorry for the tangent.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
I posted @jetsen picture of the Meg with JVC DTM and with the madVR Envy without his permission. I did not mean to start any war of words. I have apologized to him already in a PM. I was only trying to show off the Envy . I am just living vicariously in this thread and the Envy thread because they are both products on my fantasy wish list but do not have the budget. I am so glad to have this forum. I am a bit of a shutin as I suffer from PTSD, anxiety and depression. I only mention this to remind myself and all of us we never know what the other members are going through. There is a 20 year member on here in his 60s from Pittsburgh who has had to sell off most of his gear due to serious medical issues the last couple of years. I know he is heartbroken. I am trying to be a kinder gentler person going forward and reminding myself that I don't know the load the other person is carrying. Sorry for the tangent.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Hey please, don't worry, I am a grown up person I can take a hit ;-) and after all I did post the pictures myself so no need at all to apologize.
And it opened up a discussion where we can all participate in, its just that sometimes when you don't have the time and means to put everything in perspective things go very fast here, I know that but Its always a shock as to how fast things can be interpreted in many ways.
As long as we can discuss these things in a proper manner there is no need in apologizing for whatever, I just wanted to explain something in regards to the madVR story.

So relax and enjoy the discussion :) its not a war (yet :D:D)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Specifically, the three indicator status lights are showing:

Standby: Solid red
Light: flashing orange 3 times
Warning: flashing red 3 times

Per page 85, this means "CPU board occurs error", which I think is a translation issue, it should probably read CPU board error occurs.

Anyways, it did it again last night...that makes 2 out of the past 3 days...contacted JVC again
Update 3/6/20: I tried for about 2 hours last night to duplicate the error lights but they didn't come back. And since there were no error lights, it means there were no error lights on the Inneos Real4K adapters, which I thought might have been the problem. Figures! Of course. You try to duplicate the problem and it doesn't happen. You don't try and then it does. Intermittent problems are tough. Right now I'm thinking that when it happened, I seemed to have an HDMI handshake issue because I changed inputs on my receiver and that's when it locked up. Also my receiver (Arcam AVR850) is known for handshake issues. The weird part is that I reseated the HDMI cables on the PJ and it still happened. However after reseating the HDMI cables on the back of the receiver, I don't believe it happened after that. So it could be that the HDMI/fiber adapter needed to be reset. Another reason for the error lights could be that my Inneos Real4K adapter may have been blocking the air intake on the back of the unit enough to make it overheat. Or, maybe it has something to do with it hanging from the ceiling. Or maybe it was a combination of any of those reasons. I recreated the situation as best I could. I removed the PJ from the ceiling temporarily and I hooked it up closer to my equipment rack. I used the same surge protector, the same Inneos Real4K adapater, the same electrical circuit, and I even rested the Chief SLB281 mount on top (bottom, really) of the unit to recreate heat conditions. I even used the same outlet on the surge protector. No luck. So right now I'm stumped. I'll experiment more and I'll probably re-install it up on the ceiling mount this weekend and report back later.
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | B&W 802D3, HTM1D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,378 Posts
Agreed. I am considering using an Envy over the Lumagen for my rs4500 on order. But the Lumagen is still the gold standard for video processing and i would really want to see @Kris Deering review the new kid on the block (Envy) before spending a lot of money on this.

I would hope @madshi would offer Kris a review unit ! Soon !!
Arrow just sold off his lumagen because the Envy was so much more impressive to him. He said it several times. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,747 Posts
Hello, everyone.

Does JVC US have international warranty to purchase?
My friend has a plan to move back to original country. A dealer offers 2-year $399 and 4-year $599 international warranty for JVC DLA-NX9.
After purchasing the warranty, it will be registered online.
Do these JVC international warranty really exist? Is it true that JVC has international warranty to purchase?

Thank you for your help.
A JVC projector bought in the US comes with a US only warranty. JVC does not sell any kind of extended warranty or international warranty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,747 Posts
Again, I'll have to see it. JVC's DTM was quite excellent. As far as recapturing any lost details due to clipping, you not only have the three different frame adapt settings, but you also have the contrast adjustment in the projector as well.



To me "hot and cold" better would mean a kind of improvement where the image would then come off the screen or something drastically different.



I guess I'll have to see it to get my own perspective. My reasoning is that an appendage to the display is still not going to cause the display to exceed its own capabilities, and once you have some modicum of control over clipping, like what JVC's DTM does, how does one get to a difference as drastic as "hot and cold"?[/quote @jetsen posted these pictures over in the madVR Envy anticipation thread. He is under NDA so he can't say much. You judge for yourself. This is a scene from The Meg. Much more detail in the ocean and the sky with Envy than just DTM JVC. This is the NX9 with a DCR lens.


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Funny, but I just saw this scene on a JVC, using JVC's DTM at JVC's Bigger is better event and the clouds looked like the second picture. They were clearly defined. Kris Deering set up the projectors, but they were not even fully calibrated. So the above picture is not a correct representation of what JVC's DTM can do. These scenes in the Meg were used to show the difference between JVC DTM and the Sony 695.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,171 Posts
Funny, but I just saw this scene on an RS3000 with DCR lens, using JVC's DTM at JVC's Bigger is better event and the clouds looked like the second picture. They were clearly defined. Kris Deering set up the projectors, but they were not even fully calibrated. So the above picture is not a correct representation of what JVC's DTM can do. These scenes in the Meg were used to show the difference between JVC DTM and the Sony 695.
I guess it just shows how valuable calibration by Kris really is. Worth every penny.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,747 Posts
As you can see, that what I mentioned in my other post, it is of course possible to get the JVC show more detail, but that means you would have to lower the clipping point a whole lot.
As you can see in the next set of images, I just made a fast alteration to the contrast of the JVC in the DTM preset and then you have the same clouds as with the Envy.

Only problem is, that ;

1) You lower the level of the entire image quite a lot (almost not to see on the picture as the I phone adjusts its iris to compensate) in real life the difference is serious. Now you could compensate this again by setting the DTM on mid or high, beu then again you are messing around.
2) When you do this, the next time you watch a movie that is at 1000 nit instead of 4000 you have to start all over again because otherwise you will get a picture that is way too dark.

That is the whole point of the madVr, is set and forget, I set the preset target nits and then its almost hands free, unless you like to tweak a little more.

So yes i believe you that you saw the meg on the JVC as it looked on the Envy, only it was made to look good for that movie, for another one you would need to adjust again, and again.

I hope I made things a bit more clear, again the difference in brightness is way more in real life then on the I phone pics.

And now I am off to go and watch a movie :D
In Kris's JVC setup, the Meg was not clipping, no adjustments were made to the JVC specifically for that movie. We were going back and forth between movies like the Meg and Blade Runner, with zero adjustments to the JVC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,747 Posts
I had been using the Panasonic UB9000 and its static tone mapping for HDR on my VW760 for quite some time. Having 185 nits available this had worked pretty well for me. So, despite of some very difficult scenes, I could easily enjoy all my movies with just 2 settings. But it took a while and before Sony provided better HDR EOTF curves I even had to use Arve curves ...

As an video enthusiast trying to get always the best possible picture I had closely monitored all the great progress on madVR (particularly last year). Therefore I had also compared madVR vs my Panasonic in my setup last summer. Then I had decided - easily - to go for the Envy / madVR. Later on I had invested a lot of time to find optimal HSTM parameter settings - so lots of pixel peeping sessions on the very high level that madVR provides. Of course I had also seen JVC' FA on several occasions both at my dealer and in the room of a friend of mine. My first impressions of the FA were also pretty good. I had then the chance to test an N5 for some time in my homecinema confirming what I had seen already from the very beginning. Many scenes looked perfectly fine using FA on the first glance. However pixel peeping you'll notice the differences to madVR with brighter pixels blown out. This you would however notice only with a trained eye or in a 1:1 comparison side by side. On the bad side I had found that I could run the N5 only in high lamp mode and used FA mostly on high (depending on the movie). But even in the same movie I had found that sometimes the picture is overexposed (too bright) or too dark. With madVR I have 1 setting and it works always for me. That is the big difference: with madVR I got a consistency that I had missed with FA. Plus on a pixel peeping level I noticed that the JVC FA couldn't compete either.

So I fully agree with what jetsen and Arrow-AV wrote about FA vs madVR. For me madVr is nothing less than the gold standard for upscaling and DTM. So in order to squeeze out the best from any projector based on what I had seen there is no better other option for me than madVR. I had tested madVR on a VW760, an N5 and a Sim2 Nero 3 plus (with only 85 nits). The results were always very impressive.
MadVR may be the Gold standard ( I have not seen it on a projector setup), but that does not change the fact that the JVC DTM Meg picture is not a correct example of what JVC's DTM in auto is capable of. Heck even an RS1000 does a better job on that image, than what was shown.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
In Kris's JVC setup, the Meg was not clipping, no adjustments were made to the JVC specifically for that movie. We were going back and forth between movies like the Meg and Blade Runner, with zero adjustments to the JVC.
Did you read my other post? the question is, where did Kris set the clipping point in the JVC, again I said it is perfectly possible to not let the JVC clip on that scene, but it all depends on where you decide to let the projector clip. and again I said these are highley compressed pictures.

So lets put up a picture from the meg with the JVC tone mapping that shows all the details in the sky but where you also can see what settings are at what level, on the DTM of the jvc, then we can discuss why one picture with DTM looks different then the other.
I showed you a picture where the clouds on the JVC are also perfectly visible with the DTM, if you lower the clipping point then yes, it will look the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
Again , its great that many users are 100% happy with the JVC DTM, but when you see all the options side by side you will realise that its mabye not as good as you had percieved....sometimes a "reality check" is in order.
Whilst the JVC DTM is very good, and superior to static HDR10 HDR optimization solutions, there are many instances of chroma shifting, as well as both bright highlight detail loss, shadow detail loss, and contrast loss, which are not present with the madVR Envy DTM. When I have more time I will take some professional photography screenshots to demonstrate this (currently preparing for the Christie Eclipse demo event this weekend).
Thanks @woofer and @ARROW-AV . I had missed those posts above. You know, I no longer have the JVC and now need a good external mapper. I now see your reasons underlying why you both said the improvements are significant. Thank you both.

My first impressions of the FA were also pretty good. I had then the chance to test an N5 for some time in my homecinema confirming what I had seen already from the very beginning. Many scenes looked perfectly fine using FA on the first glance. However pixel peeping you'll notice the differences to madVR with brighter pixels blown out. This you would however notice only with a trained eye or in a 1:1 comparison side by side. On the bad side I had found that I could run the N5 only in high lamp mode and used FA mostly on high (depending on the movie). But even in the same movie I had found that sometimes the picture is overexposed (too bright) or too dark. With madVR I have 1 setting and it works always for me. That is the big difference: with madVR I got a consistency that I had missed with FA. Plus on a pixel peeping level I noticed that the JVC FA couldn't compete either.

So I fully agree with what jetsen and Arrow-AV wrote about FA vs madVR. For me madVr is nothing less than the gold standard for upscaling and DTM.
I appreciate this information, Mori. It's also very helpful.
 
24361 - 24380 of 29257 Posts
Top