This is topic Simplex gate noise problem! -> OT AAIIs suck! No, JJs suck! No, AAIIs suck! in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007303

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-01-2005, 01:49 PM:
 
OK, I am finally giving up and going to the forums on this one:

I have ten Simplex 1050's, 6 1980 models and 4 1985 models. The 1985 ones were converted from electric turrets to manual turrets, and the traps were retrofitted to accept standard Simplex aperture plates. All are 'straight gate' machines.

All ten have had the gates and traps completely disassembled, cleaned, and rebuilt with new rails, etc. before the theatre went into operation.

The problem is that there is a very annoying metallic 'clatter' coming from several of the gates as the projector runs with film in them (no clattering when running empty). This clatter is so loud that it can be clearly be heard in the auditorium, so much as to cause customers (and management) to complain.

I have tried loosening the gate tension, and futzing with the gate stop bolt as to try to stop the clatter, but alas, if I back it off to where the clatter finally begins to subside, one of two things happen: Either the picture becomes unfocusable on one side, or the image gets totally unsteady to the point of being unwatchable!

I have the upper management leaning on me HARD to get this corrected, and am running out of ideas!!!

What can I do?!?!? (Sorry, Brad, but 'Buy Kinotons' is not an acceptable answer in this situation)

-Aaron

[ 07-04-2005, 08:38 AM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]
 

---

Posted by Rick Long Jr (Member # 541) on 07-01-2005, 01:58 PM:
 
Are they 'studio gate' models? If so, the smalller upper pressure pad assembly is usually the culprit. Try just touching the top and putting a bit of pressure on it as it runs with your finger. If this helps, check that the springs are all around the same tension.
 

---

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 07-01-2005, 02:19 PM:
 
Are you running with FilmGuard? That will help alot, those gates are incredibley noisy when run with "dry" film.

Another quick fix that works.
* take a very small piece of artists tape, place one half of it over the back of one side of the upper rail, and the other half on the body of the gate casting. (not sure if that makes much sense, if you want you can post a photo of the gate from the back side and i'll draw on it)

This little tape trick will stop the upper rail from rattling and dramatically cut the projector noise.

The pressure arms inside this style gate are made from cheap metal which warps, making it impossible to get even tension across different rails.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-01-2005, 02:19 PM:
 
1. Buy Kinoton

...other options...
2. Buy high quality port windows (or at least be sure yours are truly sealed)

3. If you must, throw some more money into the Simplexes and install curved gates. Most of those straight gate units are inherently noisy anyway.

4. Just in case, I shall mention upper loop size.

5. You can always try Rick's tip on the springs. You are probably hearing one of the 3 sections that is so loose it is chattering. In a pinch I have sandwiched a washer to shorten the distance the spring needed to push so that it would give a little more pressure. It's not a great solution, but then again I did say "buy Kinoton" from day one.

(For those not in the know, Kinoton teasing to Aaron is something I simply have to do. )
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-01-2005, 03:36 PM:
 
Does those 1050 studio trap verions have that gate stop allen screw on the inboard side of the trap assembly?

That stop allen screw WILL travel inwards after many gate openings and closings causing the assembly to close too tight, pinching the film, rattling the intermittent assembly, gouging out sprocket holes, and shedding film.

Also, with flat trap and gate assemblies, the upper loop needs to be built a good half-inch higher than the curved gate variety. For if the upper loop is too small, it will chatter the top of the rails in the gate.

Check the the old XL manual and you'll see this stop allen screw. The way to adjust is if the intermittent shoes are swiveling under the intermittent sprocket, the gate is closing too tight. Adjust the screw to where the shoes touch the sprocket upon closing and "think" of swiveling under the sprocket.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-01-2005, 09:38 PM:
 
Bwahahahahaha.... You have straight gates........ .

You know the story... Strong/Simplex..... Now approaching the 100 mark for design of different gates and traps.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-01-2005, 10:06 PM:
 
Meanwhile, the popular Century gate/trap designs (C, SA, and JJ..._not_ the horrid H type) have been trouble-free....

(Though I haven't dealt with Centurys with lens turrets, unless you count threading one reel at Brad's screening room.)

What are the other Simplex designs? I have dealt with the Super Simplex (straight), X-L (straight), X-L (curved), and Millennium (curved). What else is there (obviously the 1050...)?
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 07-02-2005, 01:10 AM:
 
Try bending the spring, to apply more pressure to the TOP set of runners. You can test this theory by first sticking your finger behind them and pressing towards the film. If that's the cause, the noise will subside.

I've found these upper pressure pads can be the source of a lot of noise if they're light on tension. You'd think that running it loosely would make it better, but it doesn't. It just rattles like a SOB.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-02-2005, 01:52 AM:
 
I'll try the top runner tension trick. (Sorry, Brad, no Kinotons...) I have noticed that pressing against the top runner DOES quiet things up a lot.

Will let you know what happens...

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-02-2005, 01:55 AM:
 
Confusious say wise men ditch idea of Strong projectors and install Kinoton on their next theater project.
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 07-02-2005, 03:03 AM:
 
But where the hell will the owner find *used* Kinotons?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-02-2005, 02:35 PM:
 
We were offered some about two months ago.... We apassed on them cause they were 16/35's and I HATE the 16mm Kinoton.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-02-2005, 04:55 PM:
 
We have a pair of FP 30s and a pair of FP 20s plus 3 FP 18s and two FP 16s
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-03-2005, 04:00 AM:
 
So: I have done the following:

I placed a small cardboard shim between the top rail and the rear of the gate housing. On several of the machines, this reduced the clatter significantly. Some of the others are still making a racket, but I think that they are because of other factors (gate set too close, etc).

I will continue trying things to attempt to get it to work.

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 07-03-2005, 03:07 PM:
 
Good deal. Zero in on it. Manually relieving the gate pressure (maybe by the thickness of a dime) will let you know if you're on the right track with the ones you suspect are too close.
 

---

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 07-03-2005, 03:20 PM:
 
Nothing says quality more than working with a projector that has cardboard jammed in it.

And please Aaron -- no matter how Brad brainwashes you -- if you allow FP-20s to be installed in Livermore I will hunt you down and kill you.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-03-2005, 04:15 PM:
 
I said nothing about FP20s. I'm talking about current production Kinoton.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-03-2005, 06:14 PM:
 
Scott, I would rather have Cinecitas than FP20's.

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 07-03-2005, 06:36 PM:
 
Curiously Brad,

ARE there ANY benefits to older Kinoton/Norelco models that make them better than Strong? Or did Kinoton just not get it right until the latest model?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-03-2005, 06:44 PM:
 
Well being that I personally do not like the AAII / DP70, I'd say yeah it took them this long to get it right.

Of course tons of people will disagree with me on that, but regardless the AAII wasn't a projector, it was a full size refrigerator built by the Mack truck company. I like things overbuilt, but that was just ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-03-2005, 10:01 PM:
 
I'll ignore the childish remarks above as I definately know better. Now I don't know of ANY 50 year old JJ's that are running... in fact there are no 50 year old JJ's. None of them seem to be able to last that long . Of course I just happen to be a BIG phillips fan and I also love the FP-20, its a really great machine.

Aaron, Why not use some shim stock........? That card board in the gate might shove you into that "Has Your Projector Ever Caught Fire" thread..... .

Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-03-2005, 11:21 PM:
 
Anyone that doesn't like the FP 20 but likes the FP 30 or PK 60 really is showing that they don't know what they are talking about....the projection mechanism is IDENTICAL. The difference is in the column (the FP 20 is smaller and sturdier) and the base...the FP 20 is more steady.

What has changed in the last couple of years are the soundheads...the FP 20 can accept the RSSD soundhead as a drop in replacement and would have it as standard if the FP 20 were still in production...the FP 20 was the superior and more expensive machine as compared to the FP 30.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-03-2005, 11:53 PM:
 
True. How many AA-2/DP70's are still in operation against the "JJ's" (outside of the Uptown in D.C.). Shoot, look how many Motiograph AA's are still in operation as well.

True, a full reel setup of a AA-2 weighed in at close to a half-ton, but those things were designed to do 70mm as the main film source, then 35mm as the secondary (and home theatre collectors would love to grab one for their home theatre..and some has).

With the "JJ" and the 35/70XL - modifications to do 70mm on an original 35mm machine layout....

Kinda like when GM, in the early 80's, decided to convert 350 cid engines to diesel usage without any modifications, especially with the cam train - didn't last too long.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-04-2005, 12:34 AM:
 
Mark, the AAIIs for film projection are about as overkill as driving a Hummer to the grocery store. They don't have to be that damned big and heavy to do the job.

Besides, every JJ I have seen has outperformed 35mm projection hands down over the various AAIIs I have seen. Also if the operator and setup technician knows what they are doing, then I wouldn't even say the AAII has much (if anything) over the JJ in terms of running 70mm. Plus parts for the JJ are readily available and do not cost so much that the theater has to shut down, most any tech can service them with ease, they don't weigh as much as 5 tanks or take up as much room, and they are easier to thread, not to mention the nonsense of precisely cueing the trap to open it (and totally fucking the drive if it should be opened during operation!!!) I also find the JJs to be much more forgiving on running damaged and shrunken film, and at least the JJ can handle a true 6000 foot reel, not this 23.5 inch oddity. A JJ can handle shorter focal length lenses, don't have the aperture 5 feet away from the port window, has the luxury of being able to open the door during projection without worrying about the door blocking part of the projected image, has easy mounting of a failsafe, etc, etc, etc. I could go on and on.

I've never worked with a Kinoton 35/70, but I can certainly vouch that they further blow away a JJ (and every other projector out there) on the screen.

I've said it before and I'll repeat it here, if the AAII was the best thing to ever happen to film projection, it would most certainly still be in production! So WHY do you love those things so much??? You've never actually posted reasons other than "built like a tank". Well, whoop-de-doo. I'll take something reasonable any day.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-04-2005, 07:40 AM:
 
From the photo gallery, I can see that the first two JJs ever manufactured are still in service. I've personally worked with JJ #118/119 (picture head and soundhead have different SNs), which is probably still in service unless the kids running it now have managed to kill it.

I can also point to many 1940/50s-vintage Century Cs which are still in daily service. Is the JJ built worse than those?

(Disclaimer: I haven't worked with AA-IIs, but the JJ isn't as bad as everyone else thinks it is. Yes, I know that Gordon and Mark and others don't like them.)
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 07-04-2005, 09:36 AM:
 
Sharpest/steadest picture I ever saw is/was on 2 JJ's at Showcase Cinemas/Louisville on 75 foot screen. (Problems with other JJ's and SA's is traced to poor maintenance & failure to properly adjust gate/lens. (Potentially ALL of them could be this good.)
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-04-2005, 09:50 AM:
 
Given damaged film, I'd rather run it on a AA2 than a JJ any day. I'm not the JJ's biggest fan...I've always considered them a bit of a b-grade projector. Their gear train was poorly designed...the film path a bit cramped. That said, they do 35mm VERY well...better than their C, and SA/DA counterparts. Most JJs have very poorly aligned pieces. It is not uncommon for the tension rollers in the mag penthouse (R31) to shift laterally as they move throughout their range due to imprecisely machined bearing receivers. Note the poor machining on the Century products is demonstratable throughout its history. No two are alike and to get things to align like mag heads and LED brakcets, one should really shim the parts to get precise alignment.

The JJ is "honored" with a scratch in its name. The term "JJ scratches" seems to convey a universal meaning. These being the ones caused by leaving the 35mm pad roller on the upper feed sprocket (in the projector head itself) and making the upper loop small enough that it will bump into the 35mm roller. It happens far too much. Long ago Century should have scrapped their rotaing pad roller assembly for the upper feed to avoid this.

But the JJ's history of film damage does not end there...The earlier form of film stabilizer on the upper portion of the gate (the two fingers that hold the upper loop against the tension bands) had a reinforceing ridge on them...the film will pucker into this ridge and cause scratching near every frame line...later designs had the fingers formed by folding the metal over and do not have this problem.

Below the gate there is a loop stabilizing roller (I think it is the RO-207) that has laid many a scratch right down the middle of the film (particularly 35mm)...it is slow and mischievious. The centered milled area is too shallow. If the film has any curl on it and the roller has any wear, the film will curl into the roller. Anyone that has JJs should look at this roller...if the middle portion of the roller has about a 1/4" wide polished/shiny section...you too have been scratching film. Change the roller and keep an eye on it.

Moving on to the soundhead (R50)...the 70mm bypass guide needs to be precisely aligned to avoid the film puckering into the middle of the guide...different vintages of guides have different amount of closeness to the film in the middle

Lastly on the JJ (though the issues with it go on) the Magazines that were made for the JJ were like the AA2 and ALL 35/70 projectors in that they were designed for 22" reels. That was the reel size for 70mm, by design. When one considers that 70mm release film was twice as wide, 25% longer (30 fps) and had magnetic sound (the added weight of say 3 22" rolls of magnetic tape), it was heavy enough and lasted 20 minutes. I suppose an arguement could have been made that when it ran 35mm it should have accommodated longer reels but back in 1954...this was not so much a concern.

As to the AA2 being made today...it was switched to the DP75 for cost reasons. No one that produced the DP75 proclaimed that it was a BETTER machine...but more affordable.

As to the cost of the AA2 to maintain...much too much is made about this...I my career, the AA2 has been the least expensive machine to keep up. It requires virtually nothing. A pair of tension bands every year or so and a change of oil and that is about it (okay, sprockets when they wear out). Maybe every 30-years or so one should overhaul it to cut down on the leaks.

Many people claim that the AA2 was designed as a 70mm machine and then was adapted to run 35mm...that simply is not the case...it was designed to run both, right out of the shoot. Each section (gate, mag head, optical head) were designs of their own.

There are certainly non-great things about the AA2...the 10-track head...why? Why would one think they would wear the 6 track and 4 track sections similarly? Most other manufacturers beat them on that one. Why the stabilizer rollers are the same diameter and same weight flywheel? That causes the two to beat off each other and causes some flutter. But their 35mm optical soundhead was light-years above their compitention with reverse scan long before it was in vogue.

I agree with Brad on the mile long focus rack...it is nice and precise but severly limits one on lens sizes...then again back when it was designed...projection booths were miles away from the screen. You couldn't buy a short lens if you wanted one. Many a Brenkert has a magna-com used for its flat lens to get the picture out of the machine.

As far as picture goes...I like the AA2...I've seen a couple that couldn't do 35mm well (Lucasfilm's pair come to mind) but the units I've had the pleasure to work with...did VERY well.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-04-2005, 09:54 AM:
 
Brad,

Heck, I know of several people that live around here that enjoy driving their hummers to the grocery store......

For starters JJs have damaged MORE 70mm film than any other projector on the planet. Now I know that you would blame that on the operator, but I blame it on poor design and cramming too much into too little space. Clearly the JJ should have had a larger main frame and a 70mm film path seperate from the optical sound reproducer. Yes, later models had a botched attempt at that with the bypass rollers. A well designed projector is forgiving of who operates it. The design is also REALLY just a glorified A model 35mm Century and nothing more. In fact it is the same identical raw casting when it starts out being machined. Even the star wheel diameter is the same as its 35mm counterpart and made from pretty questionable material and is not hardened very well.

What do I like about the DP-70??????

1. Indestructable oil pump and the best designed oil circulation system of any projector ever built. This is why they last for ever.

2. The DP-70 is the ONLY projector to actually have a REAL oil filtering system including magnets inside both the oil filter and movement to catch metal particles. No other machine has this. Ths X-L oil screen is not a filter.

3. The DP-70 holds a large amount of oil and also contributes to its almost indefinate life.

4. The quality of the metals, the excellent hardness that was obtained on them without them getting brittle, the conically ground star and cam, and the art like precision of the imtermittent which can easily last in excess of 50 years without ever being touched.

5. The TRUE non-magnetic 70mm gate runner and bands.

6. The best mag penthouse of any 70mm projector.

7. Its mass.

8. Does accept down to 32.5 mm focal length lenses.

9. Easy 24/30 fps speed change

10 The lightest runnung tension of any film trap for both formats.

11. Rarely if ever breaks down as long as the oil is changed.

12. Can produce a picture as steady as any other projector if set up properly.

13. Very heavy duty motor drive system which is easily adaptable to other types of drive systems, its massive motor mount.

14. Micrometer focus lens mount thats the equivelent to a small lathe bed.

15. Very efficient orthagonol type gear train with over 1.5" diameter verticle shaft.

16. Direct drive take up(no belt)for those that use reels.

17. Much more forgiving to improper threading. None of the nonsense guiding fingers or arms in the way to scratch 70mm film as there is in the JJ and Simplex 35/70. The 70mm film path is kept away from the 35mm optical sound head and its parts.

18. Extremely well built and simple 35mm optical sound reproducer thats located away from the 70mm film path. No 70mm film ever passes by a 35mm roller.

19. Very open - roomy and uncluttered interior thats VERY easy to keep clean. The white interior is a definate plus.

20 Most light efficient of all the 35/70mm projectors due to the double speed single blade shutter.

21. Most efficient water cooling of any projector ever made. Heavy duty aperature plates that don't warp under high heat levels.

22. Easy to repair and requires less tools once one understands it. Very roomy interior to work on it when needed.

23. Well designed base and xenon lamphouse table.

24. Having your OWN parts manufactured is no real big deal and not all that expensive. We have had made or make the following parts for them...always in stock.... and far more reasonable than Kinotons prices.

35mm gate bands, 35mm VKF feed spockets, 35mm intermittent sprockets, 35mm pad rollers, 35mm constant curve runner, xenon lamphouse table, one piece 35/70 ecentric lens adaptor barrels, vari speed motor drive kit(direct drive by the way, no belts in out rebuilds!),Auto jog system for vari-sped kit to stop machine in threding position(adaptable to other machines),reverse scan sound head mods, split lateral guide roller for sound head, 35/70 DTS reader mounting plate with tensioning rollers from original penthouse to go in place of mag penthouse.

Hope this helps!

Mark
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 07-04-2005, 10:06 AM:
 
My favorite feature of the AAII is the aperture plate that can't be removed while the projector is running.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-04-2005, 10:12 AM:
 

quote: Adam Martin

---

My favorite feature of the AAII is the aperture plate that can't be removed while the projector is running.

---

Actually I always file my DP-70 aperatures while it IS running. Just remove the gate bands and trap . Its actually easier and safer on the DP-70 than most machines. Also you won't suffer any burned fingers whilst doing so since the water cooling is so good.

Changing aperatures while running film is not possible but then why one would want to is another theme for another thread. Differnt preview formats possibly, or someone didn't do his job correctly at makeup. Stopping the machine to change aperatures is not any big deal for a good operator.

quote: Steve Guttag

---

the 10-track head...why? Why would one think they would wear the 6 track and 4 track sections similarly? Most other manufacturers beat them on that one. Why the stabilizer rollers are the same diameter and same weight flywheel? That causes the two to beat off each other and causes some flutter.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

Sharpest/steadest picture I ever saw is/was on 2 JJ's at Showcase Cinemas/Louisville on 75 foot screen. (Problems with other JJ's and SA's is traced to poor maintenance & failure to properly adjust gate/lens. (Potentially ALL of them could be this good.)

---

Oh come on Louis.... the problem would be MORE tracable to poor machining! But to get all those other JJ's as good you'd better buy Stock in a shim stock company as thay will ALL need some inserted here and there.... there is only one good machine that Century produced that had consistantly well machined castings and sub assemblies and that was the cast iron "Model C".

Mark
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-04-2005, 03:19 PM:
 
hehehehehe I just knew that would get Mark going.

By the way Mr. Steve, it's one thing to say a machine isn't forgiving of incompetent operators, but if a machine can be operated without damaging film, any damaged film that comes out of it is operator error. That's pretty cut and dry. Personally I've seen FAR more damaged film come out of Christie projector heads than any other, but again it's due to improper threading by retards who believe in that stupid "2 finger rule" thing.

(Speaking of which, on the JJ I run acetate under the loop stabilizer roller and polyester over it. Think about it. )

We all know you love your AAIIs, Mark. Don't worry, every one of those things I run across I will be sure and give you a call so you can buy them, since apparently you are one of the few who knows how to make then produce *what I would consider* to be a truly steady image. I've never seen it.

(Ponders trip to Utah to visit Mark. )
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-04-2005, 04:57 PM:
 
Brad,

When I say damaged film I mean 70mm, not 35mm. The JJ does quite well with 35mm, I like it better for that gauge. You're welcome to come out anytime I'm not on the road, just give a call and let me know.

Two of the biggest things one can do to get them to run really steady and with perfect focus is the the James Bond compound curved gate runer and having a gauge made up to properly adjust the lateral guide roller. The steadiness is great with the original runner but focus is not with largre lamps. I don't know anyone else that has bothered to make a gauge. We just ordered another batch of the gate runners to have in stock.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-04-2005, 05:00 PM:
 
I know what you meant, just teasing you anyway.

Personally, anyone who converts a JJ and doesn't replace the upper loop's 35mm pad roller for a 70mm one is just asking for trouble. If you simply do that, the whole argument is gone, and it takes less than a minute to do.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-04-2005, 05:49 PM:
 
Brad, you mussent have experienced the reinforcement ridge on the upper loop stabilizer...it will scratch your film on the frame line...thread up any way you want...it is up to the gods of humidity.

As to the lower sabilizer roller...I thread all 35mm film stocks under, 70mm over.

Can the JJ be made to run scratch free? Absolutely...I've done it for decades. Are they like that out of the crate? Not necessarily. Some of the misalignments from bad machining can not be overcome (if they bore the bearing receivers wrong, they are wrong).

Mark as for the AA2 mag stabilizers...I've yet to see one where you can't see the film fluttering going by the head...and on tones pick it off. All they needed to do was create a natural tension like was done on the JJ and most dual capspin tape decks by changing the diameter of one roller and the weight of the sabilizers.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-04-2005, 05:52 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

(Ponders trip to Utah to visit Mark. )

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

As to the lower sabilizer roller...I thread all 35mm film stocks under, 70mm over.

---

Actually the Showscam guide fingers work wonders for that part of the film path. MOst hate them though as you have to look at what you're doing when you thread up. Thet also DRASTICALLY reduce the running noise of the machine. I used the 35mm section of them on my VV machine to stabilize the loop exitig from the movement. That machine has never scratched a frame of film.

Mark

Donno Steve, On the four or five machines I've run mag on I've never seen the problemm nor with 70mm DTS.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-04-2005, 07:58 PM:
 
Steve, in most good sized auditoriums I remove that roller entirely, as the loop needs to be made small to ensure precise sound sync. It's in small auditoriums and my screening room that I use them (so I can make a larger lower loop), and never in many years have I seen a hint of scratching, including some of the extreme torture testing that I did in my screening room when selecting the fabric for our current line of media.
 

---

Posted by Andy Bergstrom (Member # 360) on 07-05-2005, 09:17 AM:
 
2. The DP-70 is the ONLY projector to actually have a REAL oil filtering system including magnets inside both the oil filter and movement to catch metal particles. No other machine has this. Ths X-L oil screen is not a filter

Don't Cinnemechannica V-8's have an oil filter/magnet assembly also? I believe it is located behind the sightglass in the upper righthand corner of the machine.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-05-2005, 09:28 AM:
 
Yes the V8 has a bar magnet in the sight glass that one is advised to remove if you plan to run a lot of mag 70mm prints as it is in line with the film path
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 07-05-2005, 10:47 AM:
 
Ernemann E-15, on some machines, the oil fill screw is also a magnet.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-05-2005, 09:50 PM:
 
The DP-70 definately has the tightest mesh oil filter screen I've ever seen in a projector. Much much finer that in the VIC-8's that I work with. The VIC-8 is also lacking a particle magnet in the intermittent.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Dick Prather (Member # 1136) on 07-07-2005, 01:55 PM:
 
Aaron,
I don't think I ever heard if you solved your film path noise problem on your Simplex's. I had some questions on the type of trap / gates that were put in. If you would like to e-mail me with a phone number perhaps we could chat. I may have some things you can try.
Dick
 

---

Posted by Brian D. Whitish (Member # 825) on 07-08-2005, 05:14 AM:
 
Mr. Prather should be listened to on anything having to do with Simplex's. Hi Dick! I was the first manager at the Metro and worked for Larry Moyer in Portland. I believe we have a common aquatance in one Pete Kerchinsky who now works at the Metro which has many projectors you have rebuilt. As I recall a couple of your rebuilds are at the Varsity as well. Im now at Landmarks Guild 45th in Seattle. I hope all is well with you. Dick does a great job with Simplex projectors! Since that is what I learned on I will always have a soft spot in my heart for 50's vintage Xls. I currently have two Norelco AAIIs which, like Mark, I have come to love. They require oil and new bands and thats about it. Especially when running 70mm.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 07-08-2005, 12:16 PM:
 
Hey, we are all just fooling ourselves compared to Dick Prather!
 

---