1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Barco Cine 6 test.

Discussion in 'Projectors, Screens & Video Processors' started by uncle eric, Jul 4, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. uncle eric

    uncle eric
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just had a look at John Archers test (what video & tv) of the Barco Cine 6 and I must say that it seems fairly promising.
    While the test was not as in depth as I would have liked (thats another story and thread), there is still a lot of spec info. I think the Cine 6 may pose a real threat to both Seleco 400 and 500 models. At 5900.00 pounds (correct me if I'm wrong) its a little cheaper than the 400 and a lot cheaper than the 500 models. On the plus side the Cine 6 does have a progressive board (hate calling them line doublers) like the 400/500 Seleco's. However, the Cine 6 does have the same draw back as the Seleco 400/500 models in that they cannot scan high enough to do 720p (or triple). Of course some would argue that there is not much point in a 7" CRT doing triple as the beam spot size is not tight enough to improve things further.
    I would tend to disagree with this as I have seen very well set up 7" NEC's and Dwin's looking beautiful at 720p (both NEC's with HTPC and the Dwin with the transcanner).
    Has Barco put the cat amongst the pigeons or will we keep seeing more Seleco's as the installers choice (in europe anyway)?

    Eric
    P.S. Or do the installers have higher margins with the Seleco's :eek:
     
  2. Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi Eric!!!
    It still seems a lot of money though-and do you think you need the extra at 720p? :rolleyes:
     
  3. Gordon @ Convergent AV

    Gordon @ Convergent AV
    Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    13,999
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Living in Surrey, covering UK!
    Ratings:
    +2,803
    Uncle Eric: Margin on Seleco and Barco is similar enough to make it a non issue.

    The NEC 7" units are electromagnetic focus devices and have a very small beam spot size allowing them to benefit form tripling and quadrupling. They also have a slightly enlarged phosphor area. Think of them as 7 1/2" ers...

    The DWIN500 was also an electromagnetic focus device so it has similar capability. The DWIN 700 went back to electrostatic focus but it seems to be a very tight design allowing it to work most efficiently at 600P I think. Similar to the Seleco800.

    Seleco/SIM2 no longer do the 400. They now do the 420 which, I believe is a 500 without the glass lenses. It comes without the internal doubler but can be bought bundled with an Iscan.... I haven't seen one but it sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

    Just more info for the pot...

    Gordon
     
  4. HT Dude

    HT Dude
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re resolutions, my 1209 is running at 1440x720 for a 6.5 foot wide screen. For anamorphic movies, it's perfect. For non anamorphic, it needs more lines since at 720 they are visible. I haven't been bothered to set it up, yet, though, since the vast majority of my software is anamorphic.
     
  5. Rob

    Rob
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2000
    Messages:
    1,279
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +33
    After experimenting with various resolutions, I've found triple works best for me. Using a Quadscan with an 808g.720 NTSC 868 PAL. This seemes to give the best for anamorphic and non-anamorphic sources. Line structure is slightly noticeable if you put your nose up to the screen, but not noticeable at all from the seating position. I did try Quadruple, DILA and XGA , which seemed to give a very simelar result. Line structure wasn't noticeable at all up close, but the picture was a bit soft from normal seating position. And thats whats important.

    Regards Rob.
     
  6. uncle eric

    uncle eric
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Gordon,
    The Dwin is a great little projector and can be had for not much more than the Cine 6 (across the pond that is), of course once it reaches here, well you know the story.
    Out of interest whats the retail price on the Seleco 420?

    Rob,
    I run my 808s at 960p through a cinematrix moded 7700. Of course, it should look slightly soft but it does'ent. It actually looks incredible. On animation (some, not all) the cinematrix does suffer from combing but as I watch very little of this it does'ent really bother me. 99% of my viewing is film based material. It looks beautiful.
    Frank doorhof the Cinematrix agent in Holland actually runs his G70 at 1200p (as witnessed by another AVS member)
    Man that beam spot must be small.

    Eric
     
  7. Chris Frost

    Chris Frost
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,755
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Ratings:
    +108
    Eric,
    The Sim2 SVP420 has a retail price of £5028 inc VAT. You can then add your choice of line processor (iScan, Quadscan, Vigatec, Rock etc) or use it with a PS DVD player.

    The ceiling bracket is included in the price and the unit comes with a three year warranty.

    Regards
     
  8. uncle eric

    uncle eric
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi Chris,
    What was the price of the old 400?
    Sorry to be nosey, sounds like your new model is cheaper.
    Best wishes
    Eric
     
  9. uncle eric

    uncle eric
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just a short note regarding the actual review by John Archer, I would just like to mention a couple of points.

    Hope you read this John.

    With respect, below is information, I for one would have liked to be included in the Cine 6 review.

    It would have been interesting to have read what source was used for the review.
    For example its clear from this and other forums that many HT fans use HTPC. Was HTPC tried during the test? Which DVD player was used. Was it an interlaced player using the internal Barco LD to achieve a progressive image. Was a progressive scan player used to compare the quality of the internal Barco LD. Or indeed was an iscan used for a comparison.
    Exactly what was the focus problem that was very briefly mentioned.
    If I were spending nearly six grand on a display device I would like more than a 15 word explanation about its "Downer". Who was the projector set up by and how long did this take. Maybe the focus problems could have been improved if the installer spent more time tweeking the machine. Who Knows. Not me thats for sure!

    John, another thing to note while writing CRT reviews is to comment on the screen size used. For prospective buyers it would be useful to know how far back would this particular machine be for its ideal screen size. (I dont buy this Max 6 Meter size screen stuff thats mentioned in the spec's box)
    Not all of us have dedicated or large rooms to put this gear in. Maybe the room we had in mind is just too small. Maybe the screen we have is to big, very plausable if you are going from a bright single lense device to CRT. I realize, the installer would normally do a survey of the site before the install but up to that point everyones time would have been wasted. Yes most CRT's are (very) roughly 1.5x screen width back but not all.

    Also, its very nice to see lovely big pictures of HT gear but not at the expense of taking up 40% of a 2 page spread which could have been used for more useful editorial info!

    Yes I do by the mag from time to time.

    Eric


    [ 05-07-2001: Message edited by: uncle eric ]

    [ 05-07-2001: Message edited by: uncle eric ]
     
  10. Chris Frost

    Chris Frost
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,755
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Cheshire
    Ratings:
    +108
    Eric,
    The original price of the SVP400HT when launched some 5 years ago was roughly £6500.

    With updates and additions to the spec (component progressive scan input) the newer SVP400Plus model weighed in at £6960 retail.

    September 2000 saw the introduction of the SVP450Plus, which replaced the 400. This unit was based on the higher specified SVD500Plus. The main improvements were improved resolution and higher scan rate. Despite the improvements we were able to keep the price to £6960.

    Although the optimum resolution remained at 480p, the SVP450Plus produced more detailed pictures when displaying anamorphic DVD than the 400HT/Plus models.

    SVP420 was introduced this year to answer the demand for a progressive scan capable projector which is able to work with other manufacturers line processing equipment. Naturally we recommend either the iScan Pro or Quadscan Elite as we know they work particularly well with these products.

    SVP420Plus is, in effect, an SVD500 but with no Seleco line doubler and is fitted with the lower cost composite lenses whereas the 500 uses all glass lenses.

    Regards
     
  11. uncle eric

    uncle eric
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thanks Chris.
    Eric
     
  12. Rob

    Rob
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2000
    Messages:
    1,279
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +33
    Chris,

    I found a set of HD6 glass lenses made a huge difference to a 320 I once had. If any 400/420 owners get a chance to buy a set at a reasonable price its well worth it.

    Rob.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...