Help me understand real benefit of Lumagen or MadVR

[josh]

I'm curious about the real-world benefit of adding in outboard video processing.

Hypothetical setup for this question:

• Processor: a current medium-to-high end processor or receiver like Anthem AVM70-8K/MRX1140-8K/MRX740-8K, possibly Marantz AV10
• Display: a high end latest generation consumer OLED or MiniLED panel (maybe Bravia 9 or similar) at 85" or so. (So I'm excluding projectors for this question)
• Source: Kaleidescape Strato-C, or possibly -V for DV content.
• Content: Assume 4K HDR content and/or 4K/DV content will be the vast majority of my viewing... maybe occasionally some 4K SDR, and rarely, HD SDR.

What real, visible benefit would I get, if any, from adding in a Lumagen or MadVR? Is it really just going to be noticeable improvements for HD-SDR or 4K SDR content?

Phrased another way, isn't the built-in processing from these pretty good latest-gen pre/pro and latest panels "good enough" for this type of setup and content?

I don't like to complicate my equipment setup, optimization, etc. (and cost) unless there's a very good visual benefit to doing so, but willing to do so if it really means a "wow" benefit without excessive optimizing geek settings for different types of movies all the time.

Eager to hear thoughts from more technical folks here.

Thanks!

 

[DieZwei]

Really depends on the capabilities of the display.
A video processor has a lot of benefits for projection when it comes to low light DTM, aspect ration mapping for a scope screen or masking control. But i agree for a display setup, benefits are limited. And especially if "good enough" is good enough for you, then i´d think twice before adding a video processor to the setup. We use a madVR Envy as a standard for our cinema room installs for projection, but would only add one to a TV setup if the client insists on getting the 100%.
For clients really interested, we would send out an Envy for testing. Shipping from Germany to the US would be a bit too much, but you should find a dealer in your area you could ask.

 

[josh]

Really depends on the capabilities of the display.
A video processor has a lot of benefits for projection when it comes to low light DTM, aspect ration mapping for a scope screen or masking control. But i agree for a display setup, benefits are limited. And especially if "good enough" is good enough for you, then i´d think twice before adding a video processor to the setup. We use a madVR Envy as a standard for our cinema room installs for projection, but would only add one to a TV setup if the client insists on getting the 100%.
For clients really interested, we would send out an Envy for testing. Shipping from Germany to the US would be a bit too much, but you should find a dealer in your area you could ask.

that's a great answer, and roughly what I was thinking. Super helpful @DieZwei

 

[SterlingMax]

I'm curious about the real-world benefit of adding in outboard video processing.

Hypothetical setup for this question:

• Processor: a current medium-to-high end processor or receiver like Anthem AVM70-8K/MRX1140-8K/MRX740-8K, possibly Marantz AV10
• Display: a high end latest generation consumer OLED or MiniLED panel (maybe Bravia 9 or similar) at 85" or so. (So I'm excluding projectors for this question)
• Source: Kaleidescape Strato-C, or possibly -V for DV content.
• Content: Assume 4K HDR content and/or 4K/DV content will be the vast majority of my viewing... maybe occasionally some 4K SDR, and rarely, HD SDR.

What real, visible benefit would I get, if any, from adding in a Lumagen or MadVR? Is it really just going to be noticeable improvements for HD-SDR or 4K SDR content?

Phrased another way, isn't the built-in processing from these pretty good latest-gen pre/pro and latest panels "good enough" for this type of setup and content?

I don't like to complicate my equipment setup, optimization, etc. (and cost) unless there's a very good visual benefit to doing so, but willing to do so if it really means a "wow" benefit without excessive optimizing geek settings for different types of movies all the time.

Eager to hear thoughts from more technical folks here.

Thanks!

I have a MadVR Envy that feeds my JVC NZ8. For my purposes, it does two really valuable things:

1. Improved tone-mapping (even compared to JVC's high-quality built-in DTM) and other subtle processing that makes a significant and visible difference even to ... non-enthusiasts. This likely doesn't apply nearly as much (if at all) to your display.

2. I run a scope screen and the MadVR automatically adjusts aspect ratios in a constant-height manner, such that all content we view (from all sources) sizes correctly to the screen with vertical bars for content narrower than 2.4 to 1 (versus having to mess with settings). Again, this also doesn't apply to your situation given the aspect ratio of your display.

Personally, I think these units are 95%+ for projector owners and that perhaps a price-no-object OLED setup would include them, you can probably get more value by buying better audio components.

 

[thrillcat]

Agreed. I have been suffering paralysis by analysis for years now about upgrading my projector, not being able to decide. Last year I added a Lumagen for tone mapping and scaling for my scope screen. The difference is not subtle. It’s the one device I wish I had bought years ago, especially with the long life of the Lumagen.

It’s not only bought me time to make my projector decision but it has made using a scope screen effortless.

That said I wouldn’t have bought for a panel.

 

[giri]

I also like Lumagen a lot for best tone mapping and also to use zoom for movie like Avatar or 2.20AR pictures to fill scope screen. The best feature is constant upgrades to device almost every two months for better improvements from last 3 years unlike most of software companies are charging subscription fees. Just like KScape, it is not easy to decide on the purchase, but now when I look back this is the best decision in my home theater setup.

When I did setup my first theater 10 years ago everyone recommends go for biggest screen possible. But now, most of the people not recommended for my Sony xw5000 projector as HDR needs more brightness. But with Lumagen combination we are perfectly happy on 147 inch 2.40 screen.

 

[randman]

I have a JVC NZ8 with madVR Envy, and I love it. While a video processor can benefit OLED, it's far more beneficial for projectors. For projector owners, it's far more beneficial for those with CinemaScope screens (such as 2.40:1 aspect ratio), so as to benefit from automatic aspect ratio control (although still very beneficial for projector owners with 16:9 screens, such as better DTM, etc.).

A video processor, IMO, should be low priority for those who don't use a projector. I personally wouldn't consider a video processor for a non-projector.

 

[josh]

Really helpful, thanks all. Seems like it's worth it for a good projector setup but really not worth it for panels.
Might consider it for our vacation home with a Sony XW6000es some day. Wondering if it will be a noticeable improvement on that projector at a 120" diag screen size.

 

[thrillcat]

Really helpful, thanks all. Seems like it's worth it for a good projector setup but really not worth it for panels.
Might consider it for our vacation home with a Sony XW6000es some day. Wondering if it will be a noticeable improvement on that projector at a 120" diag screen size.

Spoiler: Yes.

 

[SterlingMax]

Really helpful, thanks all. Seems like it's worth it for a good projector setup but really not worth it for panels.
Might consider it for our vacation home with a Sony XW6000es some day. Wondering if it will be a noticeable improvement on that projector at a 120" diag screen size.

This is an exceptionally good use case for a processor, as the onboard tone-mapping on the Sony XW6000ES isn't great (I used to own one). The difference will be very noticeable.

 

[Techthusiasm]

I've been using a madVR Envy Extreme MKII for a little while now and just put a Panamorph DCR + XM2 in my theater. I'm talking about this a lot on my YouTube lately. Happy to talk 1:1 on the phone if you want, @josh .

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

Which begs the question for Kaleidescape owners if you just have a flat panel is the Strato V worthwhile to replace a Strato C, for the extra cost involved since you have to sell your used Strato C; and to what extent will the Strato V give you a better picture than if you added a Lumagen/MadVR?

 

[thrillcat]

Which begs the question for Kaleidescape owners if you just have a flat panel is the Strato V worthwhile to replace a Strato C, for the extra cost involved since you have to sell your used Strato C; and to what extent will the Strato V give you a better picture than if you added a Lumagen/MadVR?

Confusing question. Most every answer said the processor is not needed for a flat panel.

If you have a DV flat panel, get a V and skip the processor. Sell the C to offset the cost of the V or move it to a non-DV display.

If you have a C and a projector, the Lumagen/MadVR addition is worth it, especially for scope screen users. Don’t worry about a V in this situation.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

But if you have a Strato C and a flat panel, even if the flat panel has Dolby Vision, will the Strato V actually show a benefit worth the extra $$$? Or is this question confusing to you?

 

[thrillcat]

But if you have a Strato C and a flat panel, even if the flat panel has Dolby Vision, will the Strato V actually show a benefit worth the extra $$$? Or is this question confusing to you?

The benefit of a Strato V? I think the improvement may be worth it to some, not to others, and you also have to weigh the other factors of the V like a single HDMI and the 1080p GUI. Assuming if you have a C you have storage so that’s a non-factor as well.

But your original question (and the point of this thread) was about adding a Lumagen or MadVR to a flat panel which I would not recommend regardless of which Strato you have.

 

[rafaelsmith]

I have been tempted over the years to look into a video processor but everytime I have backed down since I like the JVC DTM and my screen is 16x9...I just cannot justify the high cost for something I might actually not even notice making much if any difference. I once went to a trade show and got to see a comparison using NX7 between the native DTM and an Envy and yes I could tell a difference but to be honest...I was not entirely sure that difference was "better" ...just different... Had no idea which of the two if any were more "accurate".

I would have to be blown away by a night and day difference to justify the cost.

That said, few years ago I was saying the same thing about K...and here I am

 

[thrillcat]

I have been tempted over the years to look into a video processor but everytime I have backed down since I like the JVC DTM and my screen is 16x9...I just cannot justify the high cost for something I might actually not even notice making much if any difference. I once went to a trade show and got to see a comparison using NX7 between the native DTM and an Envy and yes I could tell a difference but to be honest...I was not entirely sure that difference was "better" ...just different... Had no idea which of the two if any were more "accurate".

I would have to be blown away by a night and day difference to justify the cost.

That said, few years ago I was saying the same thing about K...and here I am

I'd recommend checking a demo in a more flexible scenario than a trade show. I obviously prefer Lumagen, and the JVC tone mapping is great, but I'd say both Lumagen and MadVR can outperform the JVC's tone mapping. If your A/B was at a trade show, chances are the MadVR had a bunch of other features turned on to try and throw the kitchen sink and show what it can do, rather than what it SHOULD do.

If you were to turn off the MadVR's soap opera effect, er., excuse me, their MotionAI™ "feature", and defeat any stretching they may have had enabled, you could get a much more accurate head to head comparison of the tone mapping.

But you also mentioned a 16x9 screen, which eliminates the need for one of the other best features of the processors, so you may be right and you may be better off pocketing the cash and forgetting about it. But I would definitely try and get a more personal demo to compare ONLY the tone mapping, you may be surprised.

 

[DLCPhoto]

I have been tempted over the years to look into a video processor but everytime I have backed down since I like the JVC DTM and my screen is 16x9...I just cannot justify the high cost for something I might actually not even notice making much if any difference. I once went to a trade show and got to see a comparison using NX7 between the native DTM and an Envy and yes I could tell a difference but to be honest...I was not entirely sure that difference was "better" ...just different... Had no idea which of the two if any were more "accurate".

I would have to be blown away by a night and day difference to justify the cost.

That said, few years ago I was saying the same thing about K...and here I am

I totally get what you're saying. With a photography background, I am fairly sensitive to seeing crushing of shadows, clipping of highlights, etc. When I had my NX7, before the Envy, I was always very aware of the shortcomings of the JVC's DTM, always knowing that various scenes could and should look better.

I would adjust the "HDR Level" on a per-movie basis, even starting a spreadsheet to track what to use for which movie. But even that wasn't satisfactory. The settings that benefitted darker scenes in a given movie made the brighter scenes look worse. It was quite frustrating.

The Envy put all of that in the rear-view mirror, and I was able to sit back and enjoy the show, knowing that I was getting the best possible picture my projector was capable of producing. Truly "set it and forget it."

I also have a scope screen, with a DCR lens, and that introduces yet another set of frustrations and limitations. Adding the Envy solved those as well. So I couldn't imagine having my theater without it.

With a 16:9 screen, you have much less need of aspect ratio management, unless you're interested in using some Non Linear Stretch to reduce or eliminate the black bars with wider aspect ratio content.

Adding the Core to the line-up, at a much reduced price, certainly does change things for anyone considering a processor, so there is that.

Edited to Add:
Looks like thrillcat and I posted almost simultaneously! Saying many of the same things.

Regarding MotionAI, that is certainly a subjective choice, but I do know of many who are sensitive to and dislike Soap Opera Effect, who are happy with the improvements they see with MotionAI, since its settings can be tweaked to accommodate their preferences.

But others turn off any and all forms of frame interpolation, and I do understand and respect their perspective.

 

[DieZwei]

If you were to turn off the MadVR's soap opera effect, er., excuse me, their MotionAI™ "feature", and defeat any stretching they may have had enabled, you could get a much more accurate head to head comparison of the tone mapping.

We have a lot of clients who love the Envy motion interpolation and also using the NLS. I personally don´t like all of it, but no need to bash people who do.
In general, i agree with you that a trade show is not a good setting for a comparison.

 

[thrillcat]

We have a lot of clients who love the Envy motion interpolation and also using the NLS. I personally don´t like all of it, but no need to bash people who do.
In general, i agree with you that a trade show is not a good setting for a comparison.

I'm not bashing anyone who enjoys it, just pointing out that for years it's been referred to as the soap opera effect, they just have a better implementation of it and a great marketing department.

If the look of 24fps bothered me enough to consider ANY implementation of this 'feature', I'd spend my time and budget finding a projector that had better motion handling than I would finding a device to create frames that didn't exist.