zamboniman

Trey, Seriously.... from one CRT guy to another.. Your current projector should easily be better than any of the entry level digital projectors. If you were starting out and looking for a proj I may have different advise, but since you have the CRT already unless it's having trouble I'd keep it in place. Reading your further comments..... Your proj is VERY capable.... If you are looking to make any change it should be in your video source equipment. I believe your desire for change is running that proj with a 480 input. If 4:3 video is your thing..... no big deal.... but you really owe it to yourself and that proj to drive it with something that can upscale and produce more lines. To start out I'd suggest a simple PC with DVD software or upscaling DVD player for scaled DVD playback(Momitsu 880v for will drive 720p or 1080i directly to RGB). You may be amazed if all you are using today is older 480 inputs. And when you move to HD you won't believe it. Actually..... How can you stand those scanlines at 480? If you have any questions feel free to ask...... Or go hang out over at the www.avsforum.com Front Proj CRT forum.

And to echo that last paragraph regarding HD source compared to upscaling... Yes couldn't have said it better myself.....

Well he and anyone else can come over and see it and decide for themselves....... It's a standing offer Perhaps it's only my opinon and I'm ok with living it.... I'm done debating this...... This whole topic has been skewed around so much with lots of misinformation. It's unfortunate that it has been confused so much and that the consumer is the real one that loses especially with the lack of standards to adhear to... Meanwhile.... I'm just going to enjoy my theater and the wonderful picture it produces..... Anyone wants to join just let me know.. I've got a few extra seats down that basement. I must say though that being able to share my ignornace for free provides for an unbiased view. []

Dragonfyr.. I think the 480 debate keeps coming up because the link you provided to explain the merits of each format and how 720 is superior goes out of it's way to "attempt" to explain that 480p is better than 1080i http://alvyray.com/DigitalTV/default.htm It's a nice looking site with convincing explanation.... However it's full of inaccuracies. Here's just a quick list that I noticed by just a quick skimming 1. "In the progressive system, 720 lines are presented to the human eye every 1/60th of a second while the so-called 1080I system presents only 540 lines. Therefore a more accurate name for the interlaced system is 540I" WRONG! 1080i is infact 1080 "unique" lines of resolution... NOT 540.. It draws them 540 at a time true but it's every other line to assemble a true 1080 picture that you see. 2. "Not only is 720P superior to 540I in quality (note the well-known artifact: interlace flickers), but it is cheaper!" Wrong again... Cheaper for who? It's cheaper to transmit 1080i because it uses less bandwidth due to only 540 lines being needed at one time. It's cheaper to manufacture display circuitry due to less bandwidth required. About the only thing more expensive is the now being released native 1080 digital display devices (actual panels/dlp/lcd).. Electriclly it's much easier to display 1080i on a crt based display due to lower bandwidth required Here's the wringer 3. "I have seen 480P and it is wonderful. In fact, I have seen it side-by-side with 720P and 540I (well, 1080I, if you insist) systems, and 480P looks better!" I don't know what he's smoking but this comment removes all credability. The only time 480 looks better than 1080 or 720 is when you are watching native 480 content that has been poorly converted to 1080 or 720.

I have to disagree somewhat regarding information in the links provided. The argument of "i" vs "p" has a lot of merit on paper and "electrically" when bandwidth is considered. There's no doubt that 720p has advantages for certain situations. HOWEVER, the statements that 480p is as good or better than 1080i is downright absurd..... and that when compared side by side that it's indistinguishable.. (given good source material on both sides) The brain has a wonderful ability to put the interlaced frames together..... And yes it can have more flicker technically (not necessarily noticalble) and jaggies can be seen at times with certain types of motion... Bottom line is that to the eye and brain.. 1080i IS 1080 lines of resolution (sure it's 540 at a time) but to the brain it's 1080 with only occasional artifacts with 90% of the source material out there. Anybody wants to argue this fact you have an invite to come over to my place and view it directly on my setup. I'm using a CRT front proj. setup that I can "Natively" drive with whatever resolution I want. If I can send it..... It will show it Natively! No fixed pixel structure to deal with. 100" diagnol 16x9 screen. Given this setup and screen size differences in 480 I and P ..... 720P .... and 1080I are immediatly noticable... 1080I provides the FAR superior picture 90% of the time. I think the majority of one's opinions on what looks better with regards to HD is extremely skewed by smaller screen sizes, fixed pixel projection limitations and the internal video processing that goes with it, and lastly compression by content providers. On smaller screens (say less than 60 or so inches) the differences become much harder to distinguish.... and then it may become a moot point. But for very large displays true HD has been the best thing to happen. I would say probably 95% of HD displays being sold right now are fixed pixel based with some type of front end conversion processing heading off the signal. This causes a huge issue regarding what you perceive as the better input signal becuase perhaps your display just does a better job with one over the other.. I'm sure this will cause a stir.... but I'll say it again.... You want to see it.... Come on over.. I always give this demo to folks that are interested... And it's always unanimous. 1080i takes the cake for overall content. 720 pretty good... if what you are watching is constantly in high motion?? Auto race?? And 480 p or i is just not in the same league.....

partsexpress.com they have a few different styles to choose from, but I'm pretty sure they have them

Thanks for the compiments... Yeah the carpet came yesterday and we love it. We searched high and low... Every local and internet store.. Took over a month to settle on this one. Mainly price was the problem, every time we found something good it was way too expensive. It feels great too... Almost like velvet. It's made up of some very fine densly packed fibers. Ended up paying way more than I wanted but in the end I'm glad because the room is turning out really nice. Ah what the heck.... I'm only 3x over budget anyway...

3rd

2nd

Well here's an update.... You'll find some old pics a few posts back.... Some all nighters over the holiday weekend resulted in..... 1. Paint walls and trim done 2. Carpet in 3. Berkline's in place 4. Projector raised Major things left to do 1. Finish screen wall 2. Final projector alignment with actual screen 3. Finish shelving in built-in AV rack 4. Acoustic treatments/panels

wheelman, Yes I definitely checked them out...... a great deal however they would be too low. That would place them far below ear level. In my seating my head/hear level is around 40" so I'm thinking I need something in the 24" range. As a test I tried them out on some 5 gallon buckets that are roughly 15" tall... They were just too low. great deal though, I appreciate the effort!

I'd prefer something in black....... Actually you won't be able to see them in normal use. They will be behind an acoustically transparent screen-wall (large speaker grill sort of). I need black so they aren't visable through the fabric. Since they aren't to be seen normally I could just rig something up. However, looking to use a nice premade one that gets the job done well for the least cost. I've figured that once I get below the $100 dollar range it's not worth my time to build/rig something when a premade would look better and be much easier/faster.

Think 24" is enough.... or should I be looking for something in the 30" range? Seating is berkline theater recliners

Any suggestions for good stands adequate for Rb75's? Reasonably priced is better. Thanks

I've got it and I think it's great. I'd say it would be MORE than enough for that setup. Remember that HK reports true performance numbers not inflated numbers.. Usually rated at all channels driven and the amps are a high current design that excels driving difficult speakers... For a receiver that is.. Mine is driving a 2 RB75, 1RC7, 4RB15 and also feeding an SVS tube. It doesn't sweat.

No doubt the CRT is THE value out there... In reality you are getting the best pic available and also it's the least cost. They are almsot never setup well in the store (which makes them look aweful compared to the digital high priced displays) The biggest issue I have with ALL the digital displays out there Plasma, LCD, DLP you name it... They all have macro blocking/dithering/picture noise issues.... It is extremely annoying to watch.. After you see a nice smooth CRT it will drive you nuts. Funny most people don't notice it until it's pointed out to them. However you don't need a keen eye. My wife the other day crusing through the local bix box store asked me why all the $5k and up displays looked aweful compared to what was at home. She said I thought these new ones were supposed to be better.

For those that need upconversion over component..... The 2 most popular ones are by Momitsu and NeuNeo. The Momitsu has a huge following and the NeuNeo is the new kid that will output 1080p component with amazing quality for upconversion. Assuming your display can take that kind of input. Otherwise as TDK said you will have to find one of the big box versions that was made prior to a fix.

and if you really dig around you will find some players that will upconvert over component (if this is important to you). Probably not at the local big box store.... but if you do some online shopping for some of the off name brands

If it's engineering he wants and leaning toward EE... If he's ruled out Standford and MIT definitly check out Illinois at U/C. It is always ranked in the top 5 for it's eng. school, it's a big 10 school so sports and social activities are plentiful, and it's liberal arts programs are great as well so the total educational experience becomes good and well rounded. The only downer about it is its size. It's HUGE! But that can be good. Their facilities are down right awesome. Like someone else said the engineering library alone takes up a block. I got my degree there and I thought it was a great place. A lot of top minds are either there or have been there..... Everything from the transistor, LED, foundations of the internet etc.... all have roots at UofI. I am somewhat biased but it's a great school. Off the top of my head their facilities included a working semiconductor fab lab (from Intel), antenna design lab, working nuclear reactor, a National Center for Supercomputing, and a bunch of other stuff to much to list. You can do pretty much whatever inspires you and have world class faculty and equipment to work alongside.

I'm a huge Rutan fan. What a great guy for Aerospace and role model... I just wanted to point out the huge Apple and Orange comparison here. Before I lose the audiance the opening pics in this thread are amazing and are really special. Some of the discussion in this thread has really bugged me though. Mallette: I can see that you understand the physics involved here pretty well, but believe that you are missing some large key things. Rutan's wing'd re-entry system simple would not work at orbital velocities. It works for his design because it is going very slow in relative terms. The "brute force" approach by shuttle is quite elagant becuase it doesn't require much fuel and it uses free forces available (friction) to it's advantage. Yes once leaving the atmosphere gaining speed is only a matter of fuel.. You still have the problem of getting enough speed to stay there and then use your fuel approach to accellerate fast enough to maintain orbit.. If you think about it you quickly return to the various design approaches in use today. The bottom line remains you need to go REALLY fast very quickly to orbit. This requires a fast escape from gravity however you accomplish it... Any way you look at it from within or external to our atmoshphere. And with orbital speeds comes the next big issue.. How do we slow down... The wing thing isn't the answer.... You either need a LOT of fuel or the abitlity to take the heat.. The heat being the more practical approach. ah now I feel better.

I think most of you are missing some elementary physics of space flight. There are MAJOR differences between what SS1 did and what NASA is doing with the shuttle. The SS1 achievment was HUGE but lets put this in perspective. It basically made a huge altitude achievement. What NASA's shuttle does is makes a huge speed achievment. I'm sorry guys but the SS1 and anything soon to follow it is far short of ORBITAL ability. The SS1 tops out around 2660MPH... The shuttle around 17000MPH.. Getting high altitued for a brief time period is so much simpler and easier than getting escape velocity. Basically getting to space and staying in space are two completely different things. Which a craft such as SS1 has demonstrated. Getting to escape velocity is what makes oribtal travel soooo dangerous and difficult. Sure the SS1 gets to space but it falls immediatly back to earth. Even if you get to space you can't stay unless your velocity overcomes the force of gravity. I think most people don't understand this point. It's a common misconception that once out of the atmosphere that it's zero gravity. Oh there's gravity there... why do you think the SS1 falls back to earth. Really there's just no air there but plenty of gravity. There's also a misunderstanding of zero G in general as well. Once SS1 and any passengers reach space and begin to fall back to earth they experience zero G for a short time due to the fee fall. Just like that weightless feeling on a roller coaster. When reaching orbital velocity the shuttle crew is in constant free fall towards the center of earth and therefore experience continuous weightlessness. They don't fall to earth because their speed overocomes the force of gravity. Anyway it's due to this amazing amount of speed that what shuttle is doing is leaps and bounds more difficult than the SS1. The SS1 doesn't have re-entry issues to deal with. There is no re-entry so to speak. So it goes from little to no atmosphere and back.... It's not trying to slow down from 17000MPH to zero. That amazing heat and risk is due to crazy amounts of friction. Just remember a bullet travels around 1100 or so MPH.... The shuttle goes around 17000. Imaging going 15 times faster than a bullet! The SS1 was definilty an achievement if you understand it for what it is...... but really folks.... lets put this in perspective.... with a little understanding of space physics.. What the shuttle is doing on 30 year old technology is down right amazing.

As long as you are using adequate size speaker wire....... Bi-Wiring doesn't even make sense. The whole idea is silly really

I still haven't seen any normal commercial produced sources that have commited to native 1080p content stored on the media. (Game consoles excluded) I'm talking about the movie studios for movies.... and Over the air/Cable/Sat broadcast as well......

Where is it stated as fact that the HD dvd and blueray sources will support 1080p content stored on the media? And on another topic although it's not HD quality..... Upscaled standard def. material can look VERY good. Unfortunately, the upscaling that most people are familar with is terrible. The upscaling engines in just about every consumer product is just bad... There are some amazing pieces of equipment though that make it look stunning. I've been messing with scalers for years due to my CRT proj. Mainly for scan line visability purposes... But if anyone thinks that upscaled DVD looks bad they should stop over and see what it can look like done right.

I don't think it's so much a material thing..... but more of being able to view 1080i material without the interlace artifacts..... Similar to what progressive 480p did for DVD. Assuming that you have a good deinterlacing engine for 1080i that is. I don't think any of the HD standards have any plans for 1080p content. Even the limited info on HDDVD and Blueray don't suggest native 1080p content. So if it is there it will most likely be from deinterlacing. Not that all of this couldn't change overnight...