New HT Room

[jostenmeat]

Yeah, I vote josten to become czar of projection

HAH! No way, thanks. That title is for BMXTRIX, and he's held that position long before I even became a member here.

I haven't seen the 8500, but my 7500 I can basically watch TV with the lights on moderately, off on the row in front of the screen, on everywhere else. I'll add that to the 'take a picture list' and show you what I mean.

You are very helpful! However, his screen will probably double your display size. This means he would need double the lumens output to achieve your brightness. I don't know how big your screen is, but I took a quick look, and double is probably pretty close.

 

[jostenmeat]

I got a little more curious about the review I linked. It looks like on the same day I posted it, there was an update inserted regarding iris FW:

Update 11/25/2009: On those same submarine underwater scenes, and others where the change is slow and slight, the new BenQ firmware no longer waits and jumps as reported above. Rather, it's much smoother now. Every scene in Red October, Space Cowboys and those in Star Trek (Search for Spock), where the iris action annoyed me before, are now perfectly fine! I am very satisfied with the firmware upgrade, and that eliminates what has been, by far, my single largest performance complaint. -art

Under the Image Quality tab, there is a good amount of discussion in comparing the BenQ to the Epson 6500.

The screen recommendation tab is particularly interesting for this discussion. A portion here, comparing brightness of both the Epson 6500 and JVC RS10 to the BenQ. I took the liberty of boldfacing a few spots:

If you have chosen the BenQ especially because you are planning, or have a large screen (larger than 110", and really, 120 inch diagonal or larger), you are still going to have a bright image. To put it in perspective, let's use the Epson 6500UB and the JVC RS10 for comparison. The Epson measured about 470 lumens, just a bit more than half of the BenQ with its BC (Brilliant Color) off, and just less than half with it on. The JVC, one of the brighter projectors offers about 790 lumens so is just a tad less bright than the BenQ with its BC off. With BC on, the BenQ is almost 30% brighter.

Let's translate that into screen size. The image below gives you a pretty good idea of the room lighting I had for football viewing last weekend. In addition to the sunlight coming in from the bottom of one of the doors, four of the overhead recessed lights were on as well.

Room with ambient light. Assuming the Epson does a respectable job with a 100" diagonal screen (it does, without much effort), then the BenQ, with BC off, would do essentially just as well, projecting on to a 135 inch diagonal screen, or, with BC on, handling a 148" diagonal screen. Now, that's a lot of difference.

The JVC RS10 (based on my use of my RS20) which has essentially the same brightness, can handle my 128" high contrast gray. With the W6000, BC off, there isn't much difference in brightness between JVC and BenQ, but enough to say that the BenQ could handle one size larger (about 133 - 135 inch diagonal) equally well.

If you like BC on, on the BenQ W6000, then you can handle a screen about 18% larger diagonal, which translates to about 150 inches diagonal. Now that's a large screen!

So, it's a given, if movies are your thing, you can feed the BenQ a pretty large screen, regardless of whether you go high contrast gray, or, perhaps a slight gain white (1.3 - 1.4 gain), even better.

 

[rmk]

I got a little more curious about the review I linked. It looks like on the same day I posted it, there was an update inserted regarding iris FW:



Under the Image Quality tab, there is a good amount of discussion in comparing the BenQ to the Epson 6500.

The screen recommendation tab is particularly interesting for this discussion. A portion here, comparing brightness of both the Epson 6500 and JVC RS10 to the BenQ. I took the liberty of boldfacing a few spots:

That is some quality info JM and thanks to you, the BenQ is definitely in play. In looking at the Projector Central Calculator I may need to move it to a shelf on the back wall. Based upon fan noise, that might be a good thing. Again, thanks for the great information.

 

[MidnightSensi]

That is some quality info JM and thanks to you, the BenQ is definitely in play. In looking at the Projector Central Calculator I may need to move it to a shelf on the back wall. Based upon fan noise, that might be a good thing. Again, thanks for the great information.

I would think that moving it back wouldn't help the brightness.

You have an JVC RS10 now, right?

If I'm using Projector Central correctly, that should be able to easily project a 132" image with a gain of 1. And it is like right in the middle of the 'green,' so I assume that means with brightness to spare...

Maybe I'm lost, when it comes to projectors I have a hard time keeping up.

 

[rmk]

I would think that moving it back wouldn't help the brightness.

Actually it can, zooming kills brightness so a bigger screen will require a longer throw (less zoom) to maintain brightness.

You have an JVC RS10 now, right?

My projector is a JVC HD-100 (RS2) and although it makes a beautiful picture, like it's owner it is not the brightest unit.

If I'm using Projector Central correctly, that should be able to easily project a 132" image with a gain of 1. And it is like right in the middle of the 'green,' so I assume that means with brightness to spare...

Maybe I'm lost, when it comes to projectors I have a hard time keeping up.

The Seymour AT screen I'm thinking about is a 16:9, 138" diag with a 1.2 gain. If I move the projector to the back wall it will be approx 19" from lens to screen. That should work well with the BenQ.

 

[MidnightSensi]

So when's the BenQ getting delivered?

 

[rmk]

So when's the BenQ getting delivered?

Screen first but the BenQ does look like a good option.

 

[jostenmeat]

That is some quality info JM and thanks to you, the BenQ is definitely in play. In looking at the Projector Central Calculator I may need to move it to a shelf on the back wall. Based upon fan noise, that might be a good thing. Again, thanks for the great information.

You're very welcome.

I did some browsing around. I think I already forgot half of what I learned. The W6000 does indeed seem to be an excellent candidate: brightness that leaves most, if not all, of the competition in the dust, while still having good PQ, particularly good skin tones according the Feierman.

Other possibilities to consider, but none that seem to best the W6000 for this particular situation, could be the IN81, IN83 (someone might say it's overpriced at this point), W5000 if the savings are substantial enough (someone said the W6000 is going for 2.3 till Monday), W20000 (with perhaps some loss in brightness?) for better black performance while you get to play with a dual iris system. Oh yes, the Mits 3800, but a few people are complaining about reliability.

Speaking of irises, learning about this stuff was particularly interesting to me with iris implementation. I personally think the "static iris" is a cool feature, but I think it's most likely pointless here, because max lumens is key. If say one was getting a 120" screen, it then could be cool to close it up some for night, and open it up for higher ambient light situations. The In Focus models I mentioned have the static, but no DI, which means that blacks will look raised for sure at night if the iris is left wide open, especially when coming from a JVC. IN is known to be extremely sharp, great for sports, at the possible risk of looking a tad artificial for film. However, DLP is indeed known for sharpness, and is what they use in the nicer theaters. I now think of basspig, and he's using an IN82 to light up a 154" (but in 2.35 AR) Seymour. He's pretty happy with it!

Speaking of JVCs, I know you really enjoy your pic, and Feierman obviously loves them, as his last two choices are JVC, so I will be slightly saddened to see you let it go. What I really want to know, if just for myself, is the lumens difference between RS2 to RS20 to RS25. I have this habit, which I think is a good thing, to believe everything that BMX says, and so I have to reconcile his statements that the Epsons are significantly brighter, with the seemingly opposing statements of Feierman. The most obvious thing that comes to mind is that Feierman believes in only using best mode, as calibrated, and that most of us J6Ps that BMX has to service don't even know what calibration means. OTOH, even Feierman contradicted himself if I read things correctly, saying in one review that the RS10 slightly bests the output of the RS20, and then in another saying the opposite. I guess they're close in either case.

Back to the W6000:

I am now under the impression that it will run quieter than my JVC as set to high lamp. Perhaps somewhere in-between my low and high settings.

If you have future questions regarding this model to ask directly to the reviewer, here is his W6000 blog.

There is obviously a huge jump in output with using the BC mode. I'm taking my mini-summarization straight from the reviewer's performance tab, but thinking more in line with a less than a videophile expert/resource/professional. Note that with BC on, with Dynamic (one of three modes available) you can achieve a scorching 1751 lumens!! That's over 1000 more than your JVC!! Anyways, what I'm trying to impart is that the more you're willing to give up color accuracy, the more you can crank it when horsepower is needed. Otherwise, he rated it as 866 lumens in best mode (cinema w/ BC off), which is still a few hundred better than the RS2 in best mode as low lamp (537 lumens). (EDIT: btw, I don't know, but now presume, that 866 is high lamp mode?). The color inaccuracies you suffer as you go brighter will be with green in particular, and going with a cooler color temp.

Back to the JVCs:

Whew. OK. Now, the questions that have been bothering me the most in answering. Ok I just looked now. Same reviewer rates RS25 gets 506 low/ 753 high. RS15 gets . . . darn, I can't find him reviewing it. The RS20 rated 448 low/ 672 high. According to him, JVC significantly improved the audible noise after the RS1/2, and he now says that high lamp can be actually bearable. This is particularly interesting here, and that is with the RS20 review, putting the PJ close as possible with max zoom out makes for much more brightness:

Zoom out (closest position - wide-angle): 775 lumens
Mid-zoom: 672 lumens
Zoom in: 550 lumens

I, of course, assume the above is high lamp. Left uncalibrated, the best OTB setting is THX, and that's actually quite impressive at 837 lumens (just only 29 lumens than the W6000 in best mode). It is not considered best mode however.

I am wondering if you can indeed stick with JVC, whether the 10/15/20/25, etc.

Oops, my brain just exploded over my keyboard. I'll chime in again after I pick the pieces up.

 

[rmk]

Thanks for all your research and summaries JM. The BenQ is very tempting as I have always felt that DLP’s produce the most 3 dimensional image and that thing is really a light canon.

We had a full house and watched a lot of football and basketball on the Panny plasma this Thanksgiving holiday. We also watched several movies including Angels and Demons last night and the picture on the HD-100 with a 650 hr bulb was just outstanding. Black levels made the top and bottom bars invisible on true black scenes. Essentially I have a great projector, arguably the best projection screen available and near perfect dimensional geometry according to the Projector Central calculator … and I want to upgrade why?

The idea was to get a larger fixed display with the speakers behind the screen for the ultimate immersive audio experience. To accomplish this I would be going with a lesser quality screen (image quality wise), losing the versatility of the extra plasma display and dealing with YTBD issues with the new projector and the sound using new speaker locations behind an AT screen. I would also have the hassle of selling the JVC and Stewart although that shouldn’t be too difficult.

All this said I saw an ad for a new 65” Mitsubishi Laser DLP. This unit uses less than 100 watts to operate, has no lamp, produces and incredible picture and is under $5K. My experience with the LED based Vivitek H9080HD was also very positive and I believe the next couple of years will provide big technology advances for front projectors and flat screen R/P displays that will blow away what we are currently using.

So at this juncture and with some time off during the holidays, I think I will try a few things to improve what I have with some relatively minor additions/changes. I’d like to add front height speakers (JTR Slanted 8’s) and move the LCR’s and subs to accommodate another 6” or so drop of the Stewart screen. I have read a couple of very favorable reviews of Audyssey DSX and the use of height channels for HT. I am thinking the height channels may give me some of the effect I was hoping for by using AT screen. The additional drop of the Stewart will provide a better viewing angle for the front row without compromising the audio.

In any case, this is the plans as of this morning. Tomorrow morning … who knows?

 

[MidnightSensi]

I agree with you. I think it is more of a hassle than it is worth, and your projector seems to have as good of specs as any. I think before you even bother dropping the screen you should test it out.

Now that we are back on sound rather than projectors, I can be of more help....

Play with the soundstage, maybe putting the left and right speakers on the Captivators will raise it up, and then angle the center. Try some cheap stuff. I think lifting your L and R will help even out the soundstage for the people sitting in back. Lift them onto the Captivators on either side, and see if that helps. Then get some stands if it helps but you want the Captivators back where they were.

I think the height channels is just plain gimmicky; the electronics manufacturers trying to get people to buy new preamps and receivers by upgrading software rather than hardware. I think it will add very little to your system, and perhaps even cause comb filtering problems between the mains, smear your imaging and collapse the soundstage. If you want another set of Slanted 8's, you can try them as 'heights', but I think they'd be better served wired in series in the back with the others.

I don't have my JTRs yet, but when I demoed them one of their highlights was that while they are a big dynamic speaker, they still had excellent time-alignment. To put another tweeter up in your front soundstage could really throw all of that off. But there is no hurt in testing it out...Try the heights, and then try just lifting your mains. See what you think sounds better. I'll bet you a beer that moving your L C and R around will sound better than the heights.

 

[MidnightSensi]

Here is a picture of what the front soundstage of a 2020 soundsystem will look like:

The reggae soundsystems were really ahead of their time.

 

[rmk]

I agree with you. I think it is more of a hassle than it is worth, and your projector seems to have as good of specs as any. I think before you even bother dropping the screen you should test it out.

Now that we are back on sound rather than projectors, I can be of more help....

Play with the soundstage, maybe putting the left and right speakers on the Captivators will raise it up, and then angle the center. Try some cheap stuff. I think lifting your L and R will help even out the soundstage for the people sitting in back. Lift them onto the Captivators on either side, and see if that helps. Then get some stands if it helps but you want the Captivators back where they were.

I think the height channels is just plain gimmicky; the electronics manufacturers trying to get people to buy new preamps and receivers by upgrading software rather than hardware. I think it will add very little to your system, and perhaps even cause comb filtering problems between the mains, smear your imaging and collapse the soundstage. If you want another set of Slanted 8's, you can try them as 'heights', but I think they'd be better served wired in series in the back with the others.

I don't have my JTRs yet, but when I demoed them one of their highlights was that while they are a big dynamic speaker, they still had excellent time-alignment. To put another tweeter up in your front soundstage could really throw all of that off. But there is no hurt in testing it out...Try the heights, and then try just lifting your mains. See what you think sounds better. I'll bet you a beer that moving your L C and R around will sound better than the heights.

Well call me Mr. Gullible … I'm going to try out the Heights by using the existing Slanted 8's (surround backs) so nothing to purchase. If I like it, then I'll order another pair for the SB channel and get an amp. The SB's don't do much anyway so it's worth a try.

Re lifting the mains, I have thought of that but the screen is the issue. I need to move them outboard of the screen to raise them. That makes the right front speaker closer to the wall. I like having all of the coax’s at the same height so think I will leave the LCR’s where they are for now and see what the Height speakers do to the front sound stage.

 

[MidnightSensi]

Well call me Mr. Gullible … I'm going to try out the Heights by using the existing Slanted 8's (surround backs) so nothing to purchase. If I like it, then I'll order another pair for the SB channel and get an amp. The SB's don't do much anyway so it's worth a try.

Re lifting the mains, I have thought of that but the screen is the issue. I need to move them outboard of the screen to raise them. That makes the right front speaker closer to the wall. I like having all of the coax’s at the same height so think I will leave the LCR’s where they are for now and see what the Height speakers do to the front sound stage.

Mr. Gullible,

I think my last post came off as course, sorry 'bout that. Let me know how it goes with the heights, my intuition could be wrong.

 

[rmk]

Mr. Gullible,

I think my last post came off as course, sorry 'bout that. Let me know how it goes with the heights, my intuition could be wrong.

That was not course. Course would be something like "height speakers! what are you ... a moron?" ...

You may have been thinking that, but you were much more diplomatic.

I will let you know and thanks for all the suggestions.

 

[Zaluss]

Amazing setup

 

[jostenmeat]

Thanks for all your research and summaries JM. The BenQ is very tempting as I have always felt that DLP’s produce the most 3 dimensional image and that thing is really a light canon.

We had a full house and watched a lot of football and basketball on the Panny plasma this Thanksgiving holiday. We also watched several movies including Angels and Demons last night and the picture on the HD-100 with a 650 hr bulb was just outstanding. Black levels made the top and bottom bars invisible on true black scenes. Essentially I have a great projector, arguably the best projection screen available and near perfect dimensional geometry according to the Projector Central calculator … and I want to upgrade why?

So at this juncture and with some time off during the holidays, I think I will try a few things to improve what I have with some relatively minor additions/changes.

Thank you for making it stop! lol

I’d like to add front height speakers (JTR Slanted 8’s) and move the LCR’s and subs to accommodate another 6” or so drop of the Stewart screen. I have read a couple of very favorable reviews of Audyssey DSX and the use of height channels for HT. I am thinking the height channels may give me some of the effect I was hoping for by using AT screen.

I have also only read favorable reviews about DSX, even by those who had very low expectations. I've also heard the widths are where it's at, but I can see why in your room that you might benefit more from heights. Anyways, I've read others saying that even audyssey (Chris) says the widths are where it's at, but I'm sure positioning plays a big role in how much benefit there can be. Just curious, can your Integra do widths and heights at the same time, for 11.1? I know that FilmMixer has been looking forward to working on, if he hasn't already, the 384.8 Iosono system which exists in a handful of theaters like the Chinese Mann. His description of the rainforest demo is extremely impressive.

I agree with you. I think it is more of a hassle than it is worth, and your projector seems to have as good of specs as any. I think before you even bother dropping the screen you should test it out.

Don't you dare discourage our number 1 guinea pig!

I like having all of the coax’s at the same height so think I will leave the LCR’s where they are for now and see what the Height speakers do to the front sound stage.

JMO and feelings, but I rather vertically arrayed than even height of tweeters, even if they are coaxes to begin with. What are the xover points in the Triple 12? I'm sure it sounds great, either way.

oh btw, it's spelled coarse, fellas. Speaking of spelling, Spellbound was an excellent documentary, and I highly recommend it. I highly doubt it's available on BD, so maybe for a smaller system. Very "Americana" if you ask me, with contestants from such a wide variety of economic and ethnic backgrounds.

 

[rmk]

Thank you for making it stop! lol



I have also only read favorable reviews about DSX, even by those who had very low expectations. I've also heard the widths are where it's at, but I can see why in your room that you might benefit more from heights. Anyways, I've read others saying that even audyssey (Chris) says the widths are where it's at, but I'm sure positioning plays a big role in how much benefit there can be. Just curious, can your Integra do widths and heights at the same time, for 11.1? I know that FilmMixer has been looking forward to working on, if he hasn't already, the 384.8 Iosono system which exists in a handful of theaters like the Chinese Mann. His description of the rainforest demo is extremely impressive.



Don't you dare discourage our number 1 guinea pig!



JMO and feelings, but I rather vertically arrayed than even height of tweeters, even if they are coaxes to begin with. What are the xover points in the Triple 12? I'm sure it sounds great, either way.

oh btw, it's spelled coarse, fellas. Speaking of spelling, Spellbound was an excellent documentary, and I highly recommend it. I highly doubt it's available on BD, so maybe for a smaller system. Very "Americana" if you ask me, with contestants from such a wide variety of economic and ethnic backgrounds.

Always flaunting that HS education of yours, aren't you. Of course I knew it was coarse, just didn't want to embarass Sensi.

I sat in on the Audyssey Webinar on DSX and heard Chris tout the Wides. As you mentioned, my room is a poor candidate for wides so heights it is.

With the Plasma the Center needs to stay horizontal. I'm currently using a 60hz xover for the LCR's.

 

[MidnightSensi]

I only made it to second grade and most of my brain is clogged with bong resin and malted hops, but I keep trying anyways

 

[MidnightSensi]

I've been struggling with some Genelec monitors and was surfing their site and found this:

http://www.community.genelec.com/news/23/71/Where-to-place-Loudspeakers-in-a-5-1-Setup---Tip-8/

Note what they say about the center channel.

Thought you would find that interesting.

 

[rmk]

I've been struggling with some Genelec monitors and was surfing their site and found this:

http://www.community.genelec.com/news/23/71/Where-to-place-Loudspeakers-in-a-5-1-Setup---Tip-8/

Note what they say about the center channel.

Thought you would find that interesting.

Thanks for the link. This was different from similar guides in the specific max 7° height delta for the LCR HF drivers. Acording to that I'm good to go but it will be interesting to see how the height channels sound.