Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CCTV vs. glass, projection vs. LCD

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 3:06:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

There was a discussion on this topic back in 2001, but technology's
improved enough that I think it's worth revisiting. Especially because
I'm moving, and building a new studio, so now it matters to ME. That's
totally different.

I will have a 20x50 basement space to do roughly whatever I want. It's
a rowhouse with shared walls, so we're going to have to build the
control room and live room as rooms-in-a-room for isolation.

We're trying to figure out where to situate the control room, and the
studio architect suggested considering a two-way CCTV hookup.
Simultaneously, we were talking about where to put the computer monitor
for mixing in-the-box: a screen on the wall gets in the way of the
glass, and a screen above the console gets in the way of the speakers.
Right now I have the screen embedded into the console furniture, which
sort of works but involves an awful lot of neck-craning at bad angles.
(See
http://www.blackberryrock.com/main_studio.htm for current setup.) He
suggested an acoustically-transparent projection screen.

I'm starting to realize that these two ideas actually dovetail quite
nicely. Advantages:

- Control room doesn't need to face live room
- Don't need to break the wall if it's an existing structural wall
- Can overlay PC monitor with "heads-up" transparent live-room view
- Easily achieve full isolation from live room
- No weird live-room reflections from window glass
- No ergonomic issues with PC screen
- No worrying about speaker vs. screen placement
- Easily transition to surround mixing if I want to do post work
- Much easier to read tiny mixing controls, etc. when they're 5' tall

Potential issues:
- Need a screen in the live room. This can be noisy if I'm not careful.
- Less "in-person" feeling. I don't know how real that is. I can't say
I feel particularly connected to someone at the other end of a 60' room
behind a foot of glass, two doors and a talkback mic. But maybe CCTV is
even worse.
- Eyestrain. This one worries me. What's it like to mix on a
projection screen for eight hours compared to an LCD?

Anyone have any experience working with two-way CCTV-linked control
rooms and/or projection screens?

--
Jay Levitt |
Wellesley, MA | I feel calm. I feel ready. I can only
Faster: jay at jay dot fm | conclude that's because I don't have a
http://www.jay.fm | full grasp of the situation. - Mark Adler
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 3:43:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 23:06:14 -0400, Jay Levitt <jay+news@jay.fm>
wrote:

>Potential issues:
>- Need a screen in the live room. This can be noisy if I'm not careful.
>- Less "in-person" feeling. I don't know how real that is. I can't say
>I feel particularly connected to someone at the other end of a 60' room
>behind a foot of glass, two doors and a talkback mic. But maybe CCTV is
>even worse.
>- Eyestrain. This one worries me. What's it like to mix on a
>projection screen for eight hours compared to an LCD?
>
Projector bulb life ~2000 hours

Replacement bub price ~400.00 US


Dave

replace nospam with dwelp
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 7:24:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 23:06:14 -0400, Jay Levitt <jay+news@jay.fm>
wrote:


>Potential issues:

Will you be comfortable at the reduced room light levels? Adequate
contrast is dependent on Draconian control of room ambient light
levels. Or possibly, very low wash levels and *very* careful
placement of spots.

Not a deal-breaker, just that lighting design is part of the
package.


>- Eyestrain. This one worries me. What's it like to mix on a
>projection screen for eight hours compared to an LCD?

What's a good focal distance for you? Are you over or under 45?
Those older will love the focal distance. Mileages vary very
personally.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
Related resources
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 12:53:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

if i were building a new place from scratch, i would definitely pimp it
out with a/v technology.
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:40:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <b7ra81dea5l7495drjn4sch6raqnhmhhjk@4ax.com>,
chrishornbeckremovethis@att.net says...
> Will you be comfortable at the reduced room light levels? Adequate
> contrast is dependent on Draconian control of room ambient light
> levels. Or possibly, very low wash levels and *very* careful
> placement of spots.

Good point. I'd assumed that modern-day projectors were capable of
contrast in normal room lighting; I'm not a big fan of dim control
rooms. I'll have to take that into account. I suppose I could use
shuttered spots with actual focused lenses (something akin to stage
lighting), but that sounds awful precarious.

>
> >- Eyestrain. This one worries me. What's it like to mix on a
> >projection screen for eight hours compared to an LCD?
>
> What's a good focal distance for you? Are you over or under 45?
> Those older will love the focal distance. Mileages vary very
> personally.

I'm 34, but that could change. I hadn't even thought about the focal
distance. As you can see from the current photo, I'm about 4 feet from
a 24" screen, and that's just way too far. I'm severely nearsighted,
but even with full-correction contacts (-3.25 diopters, no astigmatism),
I still prefer to read up close. My regular PC screen (1920x1200) is
about a foot away, and that feels just right. In the new studio, I'd
probably be about 6-8 feet from the projection screen, but of course
everything will be bigger. For you Mac buffs, remember that PCs can't
scale their pixel size to the screen size; small fonts stay small until
Longhorn.

I was more concerned about sharpness. I know my eyes felt much better
moving from a CRT (21", 1600 x 1200) to an LCD with its real pixels, and
I assume a projector is a step in the other direction - but again,
perhaps the size increase outweighs that. I think I need to find
someone in Boston with a computer and projection screen.

--
Jay Levitt |
Wellesley, MA | I feel calm. I feel ready. I can only
Faster: jay at jay dot fm | conclude that's because I don't have a
http://www.jay.fm | full grasp of the situation. - Mark Adler
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:40:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jay Levitt" wrote...
> I'm 34, but that could change.

Probably changes every year.

> For you Mac buffs, remember that PCs can't
> scale their pixel size to the screen size; small fonts stay small
> until
> Longhorn.

You can independentl change the size of almost any Windows
element (including the font size for various parts of the windows)
since at least Win95 (10 years ago).
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:40:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Levitt wrote:
> In article <b7ra81dea5l7495drjn4sch6raqnhmhhjk@4ax.com>,
> chrishornbeckremovethis@att.net says...
>
>> Will you be comfortable at the reduced room light levels? Adequate
>> contrast is dependent on Draconian control of room ambient light
>> levels. Or possibly, very low wash levels and *very* careful
>> placement of spots.
>
>
> Good point. I'd assumed that modern-day projectors were capable of
> contrast in normal room lighting; I'm not a big fan of dim control
> rooms. I'll have to take that into account. I suppose I could use
> shuttered spots with actual focused lenses (something akin to stage
> lighting), but that sounds awful precarious.


I've done quite a few projector setups in control rooms and edit suites.

Start with a screen having some gain (dunno if you can get there with an
acoustically transparent medium.) This will help reject off-axis
scatter. Keep in mind proper screen height ratios for your viewing
distance -- the most common error I see is people using a screen that's
far too large, which increases fatigue.

You're going to want low-voltage halogen downlights with tight pattern
control and good (variac) dimmers. Be prepared to change bulbs for
better pattern or color spectrum. A 20W MR16 running full up is a lot
nicer than a 50W dimmed to a similar lux level. You'll probably need
additional masking for the lights over the front work surface. Sidewall
windows (maybe not an issue for your basement) need vertical blinds,
back wall windows need blackout drapes.

I really like the effect once it's properly tuned. To my eye, it
provides a very comfortable environment.



> I was more concerned about sharpness. I know my eyes felt much better
> moving from a CRT (21", 1600 x 1200) to an LCD with its real pixels, and
> I assume a projector is a step in the other direction - but again,
> perhaps the size increase outweighs that. I think I need to find
> someone in Boston with a computer and projection screen.

Projectors are getting better every few months. What you really need to
do is schedule a trip to Infocomm and spend a day at the projector
shootout. Really -- this will be worth your while
<http://infocomm05.expoexchange.com/&gt;
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:43:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <nc0b81hcofekdcfsgbh5b3997gttnveju8@4ax.com>,
nospam@netexpress.net says...
> Projector bulb life ~2000 hours
>
> Replacement bub price ~400.00 US

That is a very good point as well - although at the rate I use the
studio today, that's a bulb every two years. Still, something to keep
in mind.

But I do feel compelled to add:

Futuristic transparent overlay of life-size live room onto mix window,
with full crossfade lever: priceless.

--
Jay Levitt |
Wellesley, MA | I feel calm. I feel ready. I can only
Faster: jay at jay dot fm | conclude that's because I don't have a
http://www.jay.fm | full grasp of the situation. - Mark Adler
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:43:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jay Levitt" wrote ...
> Futuristic transparent overlay of life-size live room onto
> mix window, with full crossfade lever: priceless.

You can get liquid-crystal "window glass" NOW that can
switch between transparent and white at the flick of a
switch. You can see it in action as a projection screen
in several attractions at WDWorld (i.e. "Star Tours", etc.)
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 8:31:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 10:40:37 -0400, Jay Levitt <jay+news@jay.fm>
wrote:

>I'm 34, but that could change. I hadn't even thought about the focal
>distance. As you can see from the current photo, I'm about 4 feet from
>a 24" screen, and that's just way too far. I'm severely nearsighted,
>but even with full-correction contacts (-3.25 diopters, no astigmatism),
>I still prefer to read up close. My regular PC screen (1920x1200) is
>about a foot away, and that feels just right.

I had exactly the same correction when I was your age. Good news is
you'll always be able to see up close; could've been worse.

>I was more concerned about sharpness. I know my eyes felt much better
>moving from a CRT (21", 1600 x 1200) to an LCD with its real pixels, and
>I assume a projector is a step in the other direction - but again,
>perhaps the size increase outweighs that. I think I need to find
>someone in Boston with a computer and projection screen.

CRT's can't make sharp edges, which are what the eyes need to focus
on. If you can spend five figures, you can buy a plasma that will
knock your socks off in normal light, but that's a hard check to sign.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
"That's the way Stravinsky was. Bup, Bup, Bup, Bup.
The poor guy's dead now. Play it legato." -Eugene Ormandy
!