The Aurzen EAZZE D1R Air review went up this week from HomeTheaterReview's editor and as a piece of writing it's perfectly fair. Portable enough to carry between rooms, auto focus and keystone that work well enough to be watching something within a couple of minutes, Full HD, Roku built into it so you aren't hanging a stick off the back. It's honest about the weak spots too: the built-in speakers handle dialogue and nothing more, and they want more brightness the moment any ambient light gets into the room.
That last point is the review, and there is no number attached to it anywhere. No ANSI figure, no ISO figure, no measured reading, not even the manufacturer's claim quoted and then doubted. "I wish it had a bit more brightness" is a feeling. I can't shop against a feeling.
This isn't really about one writer, it's the whole sub-200-dollar category. These things are sold on a claimed lumen figure that's usually a light source rating with no relationship to what lands on a wall, and the reviews that could puncture that answer with adjectives instead. Then somebody throws a 100-inch image up in a room with a lamp on and can't work out why it looks washed out and grey.
The frustrating bit is how low the bar is. A cheap lux meter, a tape measure and a white wall gets you a repeatable number in ten minutes. It doesn't have to be lab grade, it just has to be the same procedure every time so two machines can be ranked.
Is anyone reviewing at this price actually measuring? I'd take one crude consistent number over another paragraph about how good it looks with the lights off.
That last point is the review, and there is no number attached to it anywhere. No ANSI figure, no ISO figure, no measured reading, not even the manufacturer's claim quoted and then doubted. "I wish it had a bit more brightness" is a feeling. I can't shop against a feeling.
This isn't really about one writer, it's the whole sub-200-dollar category. These things are sold on a claimed lumen figure that's usually a light source rating with no relationship to what lands on a wall, and the reviews that could puncture that answer with adjectives instead. Then somebody throws a 100-inch image up in a room with a lamp on and can't work out why it looks washed out and grey.
The frustrating bit is how low the bar is. A cheap lux meter, a tape measure and a white wall gets you a repeatable number in ten minutes. It doesn't have to be lab grade, it just has to be the same procedure every time so two machines can be ranked.
Is anyone reviewing at this price actually measuring? I'd take one crude consistent number over another paragraph about how good it looks with the lights off.
