Radiance Pro Ultra HD Processor thoughts

E

erpauls

Audioholic Intern
Met with a HT design company and they are 'Highly' recommending the use of one of these in my HT room.
I am not all that familiar with these so was wondering what people, who have some experience with them, thought?

Eric
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
Met with a HT design company and they are 'Highly' recommending the use of one of these in my HT room.
I am not all that familiar with these so was wondering what people, who have some experience with them, thought?

Eric
A quick browse suggests that it is a nice piece of gear, but I am not familiar with it.

How much $ is it?

My gut says this thing is gonna be $$$$.

What speakers are you running. If you are gonna spend $$$$ on a processor, it only makes sense if your speakers are $$$$$$$$+.

In other words, the speakers and the sub-woofers are going to have a much larger contribution to the overall sound quality than the processor. So, spend ~70% of your budget on speakers/subs.
 
E

erpauls

Audioholic Intern
Stay on topic now lol.
Yes this piece is not cheap, they are recommending pairing this with the Epson Pro Cinema 6050UB.
They appear to be recommending this solution for the picture quality, upscaling and Video switching.
The epson gives a better brightness for the larger screens.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I've heard of Lumagen before, but not their video processors particularly but am not much of a videophile. Many did like their Darbee enabled Oppo udps, tho. Does the Epson really need help from a external processor? Most tvs don't.....
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Not a chance.
Yes, it is likely better than the integrated processing inside the Epson, but I can't even imaging getting the Epson over getting a JVC to begin with. If you are in 6050 territory, I would be looking at a X790/RS540 instead at the minimum, and likely going to a NX7 if the budget allowed for it, then pairing it with an excellent source which could deliver a native image that the projector could really make look good.

Are they also suggesting an Ambient Light Rejecting (ALR) screen so your image can be completely screwed up?
 
E

erpauls

Audioholic Intern
Not a chance.
Yes, it is likely better than the integrated processing inside the Epson, but I can't even imaging getting the Epson over getting a JVC to begin with. If you are in 6050 territory, I would be looking at a X790/RS540 instead at the minimum, and likely going to a NX7 if the budget allowed for it, then pairing it with an excellent source which could deliver a native image that the projector could really make look good.

Are they also suggesting an Ambient Light Rejecting (ALR) screen so your image can be completely screwed up?
No they are not suggesting a ALP screen.
Here were the reasons they gave for going with this combination:
The epson 6050UB has 2600 lumens for better brightness.
The Radiance pro will do a better job with image processing and calibration specially when dealing with HD content. Plus it is faster at HDMI switching than running it through your receiver or AVP.

Don't shoot the messenger this is why I posted this.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
That's fine. What screen size are you looking at going with? What is your seating distance?

As I said, I'm in the 'not a chance' opinion here right now. I mean, do you need 'fast HDMI switching'? That's a very sideways reason in home theater.
Likewise, the 6050 is the same projector as the 5050 from Epson. Are you planning on using a anamorphic lens? If not, then buying the 6050 doesn't give you much more.

Spend some time reading around. The JVC projectors are the gold standard. Sony is way up there as well.

I just a DLA-X590 on a 161" diagonal 1.3 gain screen. It looks stunning. To make it look better it would need to be the X790 or better I'm sure.
 
E

erpauls

Audioholic Intern
Screen size will be done where in 150-170" range
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Screen size will be done where in 150-170" range
That's a good screen size. Similar to my 161" size. Definitely, no chance I would go for the Epson over a JVC. Then I would pair it with good components which can deliver maximum image quality. If the room was excellent, I might even spring for ISF calibration if it fit the budget.

An NX7 over a image processor though would be the way I would go. No questions asked. I hate to suggest asking elsewhere, but I would likely take this to the $3,000+ section of AVS forum and ask it there. Certainly for the price of the image processing, you could get into a mid-tier native 4K projector, and that will go a long way to delivering excellent, top-shelf results.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Spartan
That's a good screen size. Similar to my 161" size. Definitely, no chance I would go for the Epson over a JVC. Then I would pair it with good components which can deliver maximum image quality. If the room was excellent, I might even spring for ISF calibration if it fit the budget.

An NX7 over a image processor though would be the way I would go. No questions asked. I hate to suggest asking elsewhere, but I would likely take this to the $3,000+ section of AVS forum and ask it there. Certainly for the price of the image processing, you could get into a mid-tier native 4K projector, and that will go a long way to delivering excellent, top-shelf results.
I didn't think most people used an external scaler/processor for imaging anymore? What with 4k and 1080p BDs already having good image quality out of the box? I know it was a big thing when you had to upscale/deinterlace everything, but now that's not really all that necessary.

Wouldn't an upgrade to an NX7 get you better image processing as well?

If it were me, I'd get the best PJ for my budget and determine if I need an external process after the fact. I'd probably find that my calibrated PJ would probably have an excellent image quality.
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
I didn't think most people used an external scaler/processor for imaging anymore? What with 4k and 1080p BDs already having good image quality out of the box? I know it was a big thing when you had to upscale/deinterlace everything, but now that's not really all that necessary.

Wouldn't an upgrade to an NX7 get you better image processing as well?

If it were me, I'd get the best PJ for my budget and determine if I need an external process after the fact. I'd probably find that my calibrated PJ would probably have an excellent image quality.
Yeah, but that approach doesn't pad the wallet of the salesman like this stuff they are trying to push on the OP.
 
M

Movie2099

Senior Audioholic
Screen size will be done where in 150-170" range
You're better off getting the JVC NX5/7 and getting the Paladin DCR Lens. If you're going with any screen size over 160" you'll appreciate the DCR lens a lot more. The Radiance pro is nice for certain applications, but in your situation I don't think you'll need it.
 
M

mjg100

Audioholic Intern
Screen size will be done where in 150-170" range
You did not mention aspect ratio, but I assume 16:9. The Lumagen would be used for upconversion and dynamic tone mapping of HDR. Also could be used for calibration, since it has better calibration controls than the Epson. Like earlier posters said, I can't see buying a 6050 and then pairing it with a Lumagen.

Now I do use a Lumagen in my system, but I have it paired with a JVC on a scope screen. So I am using the Lumagen for auto aspect ratio control, upconversion, scaling for my DCR lens, projector calibration and HDR dynamic tone mapping. When used for all of that, it is easily justifiable. :)

With that said, I would also look at the JVC native 4K models, RS1000, RS2000 or RS3000. Heck for the price of the 6050 and Lumagen, you are getting close to JVC RS3000 territory. With the new firmware update JVC just brought out for HDR tone mapping, the JVC is even closer to the Lumagen in performance.
 
M

mjg100

Audioholic Intern
You're better off getting the JVC NX5/7 and getting the Paladin DCR Lens. If you're going with any screen size over 160" you'll appreciate the DCR lens a lot more. The Radiance pro is nice for certain applications, but in your situation I don't think you'll need it.
I would go with RS1000/NX5 and the DCR lens, if he is talking scope screen. Because with such a large screen, he would be using the projector with manual iris mostly open and probably not use the DCI P3 color filter on the RS2000/NX7. With manual iris open and no DCI P3 filter in use, not enough difference to justify the RS2000/NX7. My recommendation would be RS1000/NX5, DCR lens and a Stewart ST130 screen.

If screen is 160" diagonal 2.40 aspect ratio, you would need a minimum throw of 17'-4". If using 18' throw, you would be able to get around a maximum 32/33FL calibrated screen brightness for HDR, with high lamp and manual iris fully open. That is plenty of brightness to provide very good HDR.
 
M

Movie2099

Senior Audioholic
You did not mention aspect ratio, but I assume 16:9. The Lumagen would be used for upconversion and dynamic tone mapping of HDR. Also could be used for calibration, since it has better calibration controls than the Epson. Like earlier posters said, I can't see buying a 6050 and then pairing it with a Lumagen.

Now I do use a Lumagen in my system, but I have it paired with a JVC on a scope screen. So I am using the Lumagen for auto aspect ratio control, upconversion, scaling for my DCR lens, projector calibration and HDR dynamic tone mapping. When used for all of that, it is easily justifiable. :)

With that said, I would also look at the JVC native 4K models, RS1000, RS2000 or RS3000. Heck for the price of the 6050 and Lumagen, you are getting close to JVC RS3000 territory. With the new firmware update JVC just brought out for HDR tone mapping, the JVC is even closer to the Lumagen in performance.
Just curious, what JVC projector do you own? If you are using a newer JVC (NX5,7 or 9) i'm wondering why you're using a Radiance Pro when JVC has their own bit mapping software? Then pairing it with a DCR lens seems like it's overkill.

Not trying to sound snarky or rude, just curious on your reasons to use both accessories with the projector. For me I will be using a DCR lens with my NX9 on a 180-190" 2.40 Screen.
 
M

mjg100

Audioholic Intern
Just curious, what JVC projector do you own? If you are using a newer JVC (NX5,7 or 9) i'm wondering why you're using a Radiance Pro when JVC has their own bit mapping software? Then pairing it with a DCR lens seems like it's overkill.

Not trying to sound snarky or rude, just curious on your reasons to use both accessories with the projector. For me I will be using a DCR lens with my NX9 on a 180-190" 2.40 Screen.
I have the RS3000. One I bought the 4242 Lumagen before JVC introduced DTM to the projectors, but DTM is not my favorite feature on the Lumagen. The feature I appreciate the most is the auto aspect ratio control. As I said earlier I have a scope screen and a DCR lens. With auto aspect ratio control, I do not have to do anything. If I put in a 16:9 movie, the Lumagen fills the height of my screen, same for 1.85, 2.0, 2.2 or any other common aspect ratio. And when pausing a scope movie, the screen goes to 16:9, so that the lower menu shows up, for starting the movie again.

It makes my system very simple to use, for anyone. I used to have a horizontal expansion lens on a powered slide. So you had to slide the lens in and out of place. Now you just select watch a movie, hit play and adjust the volume level. Though if you want to use the power masking, you do need to select it, with one button push.
 
M

Movie2099

Senior Audioholic
I have the RS3000. One I bought the 4242 Lumagen before JVC introduced DTM to the projectors, but DTM is not my favorite feature on the Lumagen. The feature I appreciate the most is the auto aspect ratio control. As I said earlier I have a scope screen and a DCR lens. With auto aspect ratio control, I do not have to do anything. If I put in a 16:9 movie, the Lumagen fills the height of my screen, same for 1.85, 2.0, 2.2 or any other common aspect ratio. And when pausing a scope movie, the screen goes to 16:9, so that the lower menu shows up, for starting the movie again.

It makes my system very simple to use, for anyone. I used to have a horizontal expansion lens on a powered slide. So you had to slide the lens in and out of place. Now you just select watch a movie, hit play and adjust the volume level. Though if you want to use the power masking, you do need to select it, with one button push.
But doesn’t the DCR lens already make switching between aspect ratios fit the screen perfectly?
 
M

mjg100

Audioholic Intern
But doesn’t the DCR lens already make switching between aspect ratios fit the screen perfectly?
An anamorphic lens only fills the screen completely with scope content. So with 1.78, 1.85, 2.0 or 2.2 content it does not fill the screen completely. But then I do not fill it completely when using the Lumagen either. You can do that, but you would be adding a horizontal stretch. The Lumagen takes the effort out of making any adjustments. Which is nice for people that just want to pop in a movie and watch it.
 
E

Erod

Audioholic
It's been said by the top people in the industry that it doesn't matter what screen or projector you buy. Nothing will improve your image more than a Lumagen.
 
M

Movie2099

Senior Audioholic
It's been said by the top people in the industry that it doesn't matter what screen or projector you buy. Nothing will improve your image more than a Lumagen.
Haha, I disagree with those "top people". The Lumagen won't be relevant in the next 5 years. Unless you're still rocking 1080p or 720p the rest of your life. Sorry, a new 4k projector with DCR lens will top the Lumagen. heck you might not even need the DCR lens.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top