• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Cineversum Blackwing 2 v JVC HD1

scoobyamanda

Standard Member
Does anyone know the difference between the Cineversum blackwing 2 and the JVC HD1.

The cineversum looks the same inner case but with wings on it. But what about tech specs and picture quality. Does the cineversum use the same chipset and light engine as the JVC.

Will be using it mainly for HDDVD/ HD SKY and PS3
 

Peter Parker

Distinguished Member
I think it's technically identical but with a different case, and it quotes uncalibrated specs rather than those for D65 like the JVC.

Gary
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
Technically the same but with higher contrast ratio and lumens outputs?!

I've seen similar lumens and contrast numbers mentioned by JVC under certain conditions and pre calibration. JVC went with their calibrated numbers for the published spec and other haven't.

AVI
 

JonStatt

Well-known Member
Okay..that makes sense. Out of curiosity, do Sony (E.g Pearl/Ruby) quote pre-cal specs or post-cal?

I've seen similar lumens and contrast numbers mentioned by JVC under certain conditions and pre calibration. JVC went with their calibrated numbers for the published spec and other haven't.

AVI
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
Okay..that makes sense. Out of curiosity, do Sony (E.g Pearl/Ruby) quote pre-cal specs or post-cal?

IIRC Sony are pre calibration. Check out the cine4home.com review of the Pearl. At D65 they measured the Pearl at 390-470 (min-max zoom) Lumens in normal lamp and 580-700 in high lamp with the iris fixed open. The iris fixed open produces the highest lumens but without the DI contrast is limited and was measured at only 2200:1. Sony claim 900 lumens in the Pearl spec.

AVI
 

tryingtimes

Well-known Member
you forgot the third sibling: dreamvision dream bee

http://www.homecinema.ch/hc.aspx?tabindex=8&tabid=3366&act=3005&sact=3006&p=2&productDetailID=9713

it's butt ugly and looks like a colani-sin :rolleyes:

people say that all three are technically the same, just the case is different: "nice" (jvc), "what the hell" (blackwing) or "colani on lsd" (dreambeee) :eek:

this classification is highly imho... :D

At least Colani uses quality materials. That Dreembee looks like it was made by a 6th form student on a vacuum former :D
Mind you the initial photos of the Blackwing looked like horrible materials, but first-hand reports have been much better.
 
T

TBC

Guest
Does anyone know the difference between the Cineversum blackwing 2 and the JVC HD1.

Well, i don't know the technical difference between the two, but i know the videophile difference i practice between the two.

A few months ago i sat down with 3 others to do a 1:1 comparison of the two. My own thinking was that this was the same wine in two different bottles, where the main difference was the label itself. But i was proven wrong.

First off all we calibrated both machines, incl. white balance using measuring equipment. From factory "our" BW2 needed less tweaking than "our" HD1, and the numbers, ended up just a little better on lumens and contrast on the BW2, but not by much. In practice, with our own eyes, there was no real difference to recognize when doing the 1:1, when we are talking lumens and contrast ratio.

However there was the other, and more subtle videophile differences to acknowledge. When it came to shadowdetails, or perhaps rather all the microdynamics in the picture, the BW2 simply painted us a more alive and dynamic picture. We were simply made much more aware of all the subtle differences and nuances in the picture, and this was actually true for both film and even animation material alike. The nuances was just standing more out, and staring us more directly in the face.

To put it more plainly, the HD1 looked a bit more "clinical", timid and "data-projector" like (Compared to the BW2 not to forget :lesson: ), while the BW2 looked like a more determined video projector.

I don't know what it is Barco/Cineversum have done, but somehow they must have managed to incorporate some of their high-end and professional video projection experience, in optimizing on their own version of the JVC projector, when comparing it to the HD1.
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
Well, i don't know the technical difference between the two, but i know the videophile difference i practice between the two.

A few months ago i sat down with 3 others to do a 1:1 comparison of the two. My own thinking was that this was the same wine in two different bottles, where the main difference was the label itself. But i was proven wrong.

First off all we calibrated both machines, incl. white balance using measuring equipment. From factory "our" BW2 needed less tweaking than "our" HD1, and the numbers, ended up just a little better on lumens and contrast on the BW2, but not by much. In practice, with our own eyes, there was no real difference to recognize when doing the 1:1, when we are talking lumens and contrast ratio.

However there was the other, and more subtle videophile differences to acknowledge. When it came to shadowdetails, or perhaps rather all the microdynamics in the picture, the BW2 simply painted us a more alive and dynamic picture. We were simply made much more aware of all the subtle differences and nuances in the picture, and this was actually true for both film and even animation material alike. The nuances was just standing more out, and staring us more directly in the face.

To put it more plainly, the HD1 looked a bit more "clinical", timid and "data-projector" like (Compared to the BW2 not to forget :lesson: ), while the BW2 looked like a more determined video projector.

I don't know what it is Barco/Cineversum have done, but somehow they must have managed to incorporate some of their high-end and professional video projection experience, in optimizing on their own version of the JVC projector, when comparing it to the HD1.

I know Meridian use Wm Phelps to heavily tweak the JVC HD10K and call it the MF-1. They don't even change the case apart from a plastic strip and package it with an external VP.

Personally I doubt there is any Wm Phelps type optimisation going on with the Barco. Maybe they calibrate the product but given the price difference I would hope they did something. The lens, bulb etc also looks identical to the HD1.

Check the software version in the service menu to see if it's standard JVC.

AVI
 
T

TBC

Guest
Check the software version in the service menu to see if it's standard JVC.

Well, to late for that for me, at this time at least.
...The projectors have for now both been given back to their repective distrubuters.

But i have privatly been given an offer on a BW2 from an unfortunate retailer (not a distributer), at almost the same price as the now price reduced HD1. So in a few weeks i expect to have one. :D
 

Mr.D

Distinguished Member
Well, to late for that for me, at this time at least.
...The projectors have for now both been given back to their repective distrubuters.

:D

The somewhat nebulous comments you've posted sound at best to be no more than variation between two specific units rather than an indication that one is better than the other.
 
T

TBC

Guest
The somewhat nebulous comments you've posted sound at best to be no more than variation between two specific units rather than an indication that one is better than the other.

Well, all i can tell you is that the difference between the two projectors in picture quality and ability to manifest nuances and deliver micro dynamics- and detail was no way nebulous, but in fact very apparent and menifest for all of us doing the 1:1

Also i would feel extremely uneasy as a costumer if the quality of a particular model would differ such a degree from unit to unit ...I have not seen such a degree with any other models. For instance the only significant difference i have seen between different units of the Sony VW100 have been the convergence, and light output (depending on lamp time) But i have never seen a difference in quality of this magnitude within the scope of "the same model" when it comes to micro dynamics and nuances

With a difference as apparent as what we saw, i would think that some further and substantial calibrations and/or other optimizations have taken place by the manufacturer, or at least as suggested by AVI, ditto in the firmware/software (that might or might not have been different for the two projectors(?) and as such perhaps might have been different in the handeling of the incomming signal. ...But damn, it would be some software upgrade then i tell you! (not excluding the possibility)
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
Well, all i can tell you is that the difference between the two projectors in picture quality and ability to manifest nuances and deliver micro dynamics- and detail was no way nebulous, but in fact very apparent and menifest for all of us doing the 1:1

Also i would feel extremely uneasy as a costumer if the quality of a particular model would differ such a degree from unit to unit ...I have not seen such a degree with any other models. For instance the only significant difference i have seen between different units of the Sony VW100 have been the convergence, and light output (depending on lamp time) But i have never seen a difference in quality of this magnitude within the scope of "the same model" when it comes to micro dynamics and nuances

With a difference as apparent as what we saw, i would think that some further and substantial calibrations and/or other optimizations have taken place by the manufacturer, or at least as suggested by AVI, ditto in the firmware/software (that might or might not have been different for the two projectors(?) and as such perhaps might have been different in the handeling of the incomming signal. ...But damn, it would be some software upgrade then i tell you! (not excluding the possibility)

TBC

AFAIK JVC has not provided the tools to any company to allow access to LUT's etc. The question of specialists such a Wm Phelps accessing JVC software came up again re the HD-100 and the answer was still no at this point.

What gamma setting and present was used on each unit ?

AVI
 
T

TBC

Guest
What gamma setting and present was used on each unit ?
AVI

As far as i remember we did most of the test with the gamma set to "normal" on both machines, however i remember we tried out the other gamma presets briefly, and at least one of them raised the lower end of the spectrum further. However we settled for the "normal" setting, as we were in a controlled room, where the only "light-pollution" was from the other equipment in the room, as for example the displays on the players and the receiver.

As one of our friends are an "ISF trained" calibrator, we had borrowed and made use of his calibration tools and Color Analyzer, and with it we did a relatively quick tweak of the basics to get started. (Contrast, brightness, color, color temperature). As far as i remember we did not have to change RGB offset to get almost perfectly alligned to 6500K on any of the machines, even though the blue color in the 'color temperature' setting had to be set significantly lower on the HD1, than on the BW2 in the 'color temperature' menu. I do not remember us setting Gain and Bias however, but we did have to do a little convergence on both machines.

For these calibrations we off course utilized one of the "user"-preset.

BTW: Thanks for the good info on Phelps and access to software ect. You are the kind that makes it worthwhile using this forum. :thumbsup:
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
As far as i remember we did most of the test with the gamma set to "normal" on both machines, however i remember we tried out the other gamma presets briefly, and at least one of them raised the lower end of the spectrum further. However we settled for the "normal" setting, as we were in a controlled room, where the only "light-pollution" was from the other equipment in the room, as for example the displays on the players and the receiver.

As one of our friends are an "ISF trained" calibrator, we had borrowed and made use of his calibration tools and Color Analyzer, and with it we did a relatively quick tweak of the basics to get started. (Contrast, brightness, color, color temperature). As far as i remember we did not have to change RGB offset to get almost perfectly alligned to 6500K on any of the machines, even though the blue color in the 'color temperature' setting had to be set significantly lower on the HD1, than on the BW2 in the 'color temperature' menu. I do not remember us setting Gain and Bias however, but we did have to do a little convergence on both machines.

For these calibrations we off course utilized one of the "user"-preset.

BTW: Thanks for the good info on Phelps and access to software ect. You are the kind that makes it worthwhile using this forum. :thumbsup:

William Phelps is certainly the guru of LCOS calibration. As I mentioned in an early post Meridian use his software under license to setup the MF-1 and I believe he will also provide similar calibration services to any supported product.

It's difficult to establish what caused the difference you observed without knowing what software versions ran on each unit or knowing definatively what Cineversum do to the OEM product if anything :)

AVI
 

Mr.D

Distinguished Member
Well, all i can tell you is that the difference between the two projectors in picture quality and ability to manifest nuances and deliver micro dynamics- and detail was no way nebulous, but in fact very apparent and menifest for all of us doing the 1:1
)


There you go with the nebulous commentary again. Did you run a resolution test pattern to ascertain the detail level differences? Micro dynamics and ahem nuances aside?

Could just as easily be slight differences in the bulb performances between the two units, could be minor differences in the gamma responses, lots of things. My point is that you have not kicked up anything that is unusual between models of the same type.

The sort of variations people are reporting from a calibration perspective with regard to the HD1/RS1 are more significant that the ones you're describing and again with the exception of a few extreme cases do not strike me as being any more marked than variations between most displays.

I'd be extremely wary of adding misinformation into the various debates raging about the HD1 and as I've said your observations are somewhat nebulous. I don't see any reason to believe that the clones of the HD1 don't fall within the same performance envelope as the original JVC models.
 
T

TBC

Guest
There you go with the nebulous commentary again. Did you run a resolution test pattern to ascertain the detail level differences? Micro dynamics and ahem nuances aside?

Could just as easily be slight differences in the bulb performances between the two units, could be minor differences in the gamma responses, lots of things. My point is that you have not kicked up anything that is unusual between models of the same type.

The sort of variations people are reporting from a calibration perspective with regard to the HD1/RS1 are more significant that the ones you're describing and again with the exception of a few extreme cases do not strike me as being any more marked than variations between most displays.

I'd be extremely wary of adding misinformation into the various debates raging about the HD1 and as I've said your observations are somewhat nebulous. I don't see any reason to believe that the clones of the HD1 don't fall within the same performance envelope as the original JVC models.

Yes we did run a full resolution test pattern to determine if scaling/overscan or anything else of compromising nature was present or not. Both projectors performed equally admirable in that regard as expected, both with pixel-perfect representation. (we ran 1080p)

If you only respects "numbers on a sheet", then the only thing you want to hear about, is as i already told, that the lumen was measured as being just a little bit higher on the BW2, than the HD1 (in the same mode, and even though the BW2 had more hours running), and that we had to adjust the blue color more on the HD1 we had, than on the BW2 unit we had, to get to 6500K.

However "select numbers on a sheet" is not all that makes video.
Listen D, I am sorry if you do not like to hear about, or accept my experience, or any videophile impressions i might have. But i can only try to convey the experience and what my eyes saw with these to machines. I do believe that it is within the meaning and scope of this group and topic, and relevant to bring into a debate as this forum facilitates.

I don't make any claims to know why it was so. It "can be lots of things" as you say, and i can only agree with AVI in the sentiment that it is "difficult to establish what caused the difference [that i and the 3 others so clearly] observed without knowing what software versions ran on each unit or knowing definatively what Cineversum do to the OEM product if anything"

I am however pretty damn sure that what i saw was not on behalf of a bulb performances difference, but of quite another nature. For instance i am open to the suggestion that there could be talk of a differences in the gamma responses that happend to fit well with the StudioTek 130 screen we used, even though we used the same default gamma profile on both machines. Whatever the reason, the certainly not so indistinct effect that you wish to negate and deem "nebulous", was clearly acknowledgeable for us all at the 1:1, and present in both low and high levels of the picture.

But Again, i do not claim to know why it was so. Neither do i deny that it might have been on behalf of a difference in gamma responce and/or there might have been talk about different software versions, or any other other optimizations. What i can and do tell ,is what we all saw and experienced with the two machines we received. I do not claim anything beyond the scope of that shared experience. ...And now i have tried to convey a little bit of our impressions in this forum for debate. I am sorry if you disaprove of this, but is that not what a forum like this is all about?
 

Mr.D

Distinguished Member
and that we had to adjust the blue color more on the HD1 we had, than on the BW2 unit we had, to get to 6500K.?

That was D.65 I take it rather than 6500k?
And these resolution patterns you were also using for overscan appraisal, where can I get one of them from?


However "select numbers on a sheet" is not all that makes video.
Listen D, I am sorry if you do not like to hear about, or accept my experience, or any videophile impressions i might have. ?


Oh you are a videophile. I see. Well thats me put in my place.
 
T

TBC

Guest
That was D.65 I take it rather than 6500k?

D.65 corresponds to a correlated color temperature of 6500k, and i am quite sure that you are well aware of that, so stop all this completely unnecessary bickering :lease:

And these resolution patterns you were also using for overscan appraisal, where can I get one of them from?

To determine 1:1 pixelmapping ect. we had Digital Video Essentials HDDVD for the HD-DVD player at least, and we utilized miscellaneous 1920x1080 test patterns on a PC. I do not know where the ISF guy got all of his PC test patterns from, but the DVE-HDDVD is widely available.

If you want something very basic and free for the PC, i at least know that there is a freeware program called "Nokia monitor test", that features some resolution and especially moire test that will instantly show weather there are 1:1 pixelmapping present or not. (just google it: http://www.google.dk/search?hl=da&q=nokia+monitor+test&meta= )
...Just remember that the program does not correspond to the video playback on a PC, so don't tweak brightness ect for video with it, as there are utilized different ranges for video playback and ordinary computer desktop/graphics

Oh you are a videophile. I see. Well thats me put in my place.

Oh, please D, Stop all this completely unnecessary bickering :lease:

Being videophile in my book just means one who is concerned about high-quality video picture and results, making just about every one participating in this forum one.

Furthermore is was only reacting to your hostility to my description and experience, stating that "i am sorry if you do not like to hear about, or accept my experience, or any videophile impressions i might have". This does certainly not imply anything about "your place". If it imply's anything it is only how i experience your attitude.

But lets both try to keep this debate on track and topic, and as such aim above the mud, and ill humor :hiya:
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom