my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » CP-50 card information needed

Author Topic: CP-50 card information needed Mike Fitzgerald Expert Film Handler Posts: 224 From: Castle Hayne, NC, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 10-14-2005 01:31 PM                     We are in the process of installing a Cp-50 into a auditorium on campus here. We are going to be using a pair of V-8r and a xetron console. The amps with the system we are putting in are Cinemeccancia C-200 and the speakers are Alteec lansing surrounds and JBLS behind the screen. The thhow is 84 feet and the seating is balcony of 286 and main floor of 728. The unit currently has the following cards inside of it. • 2- Cat 22 • 3- Cat 64 • 1- Cat 150B • 1- Cat1084 • 1- Cat 117-3 • 1- Cat 109C Any thoughts on this setup are more then welcome. I have not worked with a Dolby Processor since the mid 80’s  |  IP: Logged Chris Trainor Expert Film Handler Posts: 161 From: Greenville, RI, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-14-2005 01:59 PM                        Sounds like a stock CP50. Does it have an automation module? (i forget the Cat #) or the old pushbutton switches? In any case, setting it up should be identical to the instructions found in the manual section here. You've got all original cards. You also don't appear to have a Cat 160, so there is no output for a subwoofer. Setup should be fairly easy and straghtforward if you have the tools to do an A and B chain alignment (scope, analyzer, multimeter and test films) The upgraded CP50's will have a 108-C (new version of the optical preamp which is good to have if you run reverse scan), 517 (VCA output card, requires backplane mods) 560 (subwoofer card, new style), Cat 150D or higher. If you had 560's/517's in it there would be some slight changes to how you set it up from the manual (check out the DA20 manual for help on that if you had those cards). --Chris  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 10-14-2005 02:17 PM                     I'm a bit rusty oon the o;der processors, but I'll give it a go. quote: • 2- Cat 22 'A' type noise reduction cards. Unless you're planning to run only old (pre-SR) films it would be worth trying to get a pair of Cat. 280T SR cards. you could get a SRA-5 to house them, or simply swap them for the Cat.22s. Since you will probably seldom run 'A' type prints, the latter would probably be the better option. quote: • 3- Cat 64 The standard Eq cards, no problem there. quote: • 1- Cat 150B The matrix decoder. Later versions are better, might be worth looking for one. quote: • 1- Cat1084 I don't know of a Cat. 1084, though that doesn't mean that there isn't such a thing. Do you mean Cat. 108-4? If so, this is the optical pre-amp card, and a '4' sounds like quite a late one. If you don't have a 108, then you will need one. quote: • 1- Cat 117-3 This is where I get rather rusty, I think this is the remote fader card. quote: • 1- Cat 109C This is the meter card I think, and I think it also contains the Academy filter. I seem to remember that the CP-50 needed a link card somewhere in it, at least with certain versions of the cards, but I can't remember the details. You need a switch card, Cat. 113 I think it was, do you not have one of these? CP-50 power supplies sometimes cause problems. I seem to remember that somebody made an alternative replacement which was better, but I don't know who. There is a manual for the CP-50 in the manuals section, it would be worth downloading it.  |  IP: Logged Matthew Taylor Expert Film Handler Posts: 186 From: Essex, UK Registered: Mar 2004 posted 10-14-2005 04:04 PM                     quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • 1- Cat 150B -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The matrix decoder. Later versions are better, might be worth looking for one. How do the later cat 150's differ? Is the surround decoded better?  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 10-14-2005 04:22 PM                     I can't remember the differences now. The first decoders were LCR only, no surround, in the CP-100, but I think that was before the Cat. 150 was introduced. The early surround decoders had the surround delay on a separate card from the decoder itself. Early 150s were two cards joined together, the delay was on a sort of 'daughter' card, but the whole thing fitted in one slot. More recently, the whole thing, decoder and delay, fits on one card. I think the delay is now none digitally. There have also been various 'tweaks' to the decoder in the various versions, but I can't remember the details.  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-14-2005 04:37 PM                       The Cat. 1084 is actually a Cat 108-4. The 150 B card is probably defective as far as surround output. The later C and up versions have a vastly improved matrix decoder. You may have a Cat. 112 manual switch card. There is a Cat. 113C automated switch card available. The real question is whether it is worth spending any real money on a processor this old. (I wouldn't. The street price of a 50 these days is in the low $100's). The power supply probably needs new rectifiers and. perhaps filter caps. If it works OK, go with it and be happy. There was an earlier thread about aligning the b-chain you should look up.  |  IP: Logged Chris Trainor Expert Film Handler Posts: 161 From: Greenville, RI, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-14-2005 05:34 PM                        As Sam mentioned the 150B is probably crud on surround... but might work. The 150C is decent, and the D series and up utilize a single board design and the newer style Dolby IC's. I believe the latest 150 out there is the F. Upgrading a CP50 probably isn't commercially worth it, but i've done it a few times. They sound great if you put a 150D+, 108C, 517 and 560 in it. But the problem with all those newer cards is the power supply as originally built can't really handle the load and you should replace the rectifier with something a little beefier. --Chris  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 10-16-2005 02:11 PM                        A new processor is similar to the cost of all those cards. Not only that, but a warranty too. (Also on a CP-45: more inputs, and split surrounds if you ever go digital.) Louis  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-16-2005 05:20 PM                     The 150C had LED SPI lights on it though I don't recall the other changes from the Cat. 150B. The Cat 150D was a dual card and had noted clock noise in it and had to have a sheet placed between the two cards to keep it out of the sound. The Cat 150E was the fist single board decoder and is still used on the SDU4. The Cat 150F was/is the latest of the Cat. 150 line for cinema. I would take a CP50, regardless of vintage, over a CP45 any day  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-16-2005 07:59 PM                       The C ad D versions were the same card, but the C did not have the shield. I must reluctantly agree about the 50 vs. the 45. The 5 is simply grossly overpriced for a very humble processor.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-18-2005 07:28 PM                     Sam, I have to agree and disagree with them not being worth doing anything with. Considering that all CP-50's generally sound better than present day USL or Smart processors its really a bargain for the small theatre, seldom used screening room, or home setup. With some expenditure into several new cards its actually a dam good sounding unit and certainly comparable to a CP-55. At times some of those cards can be aquired fomr sealers that have excess or used cards laying around or on E-Bay for on the cheap, including CAT 280's. One just has to watch out for deals and steals on the cards. There are other ways around the old power supply issue and thats by adding an external switcher type supply. Mines been running that way now for a number of years just fine. It cost me 50 bucks new from surplus. So for those that are willing to do at least some upgrades or have the ability to add a new higher power external supply the 50 can be a real bargain. I don't intend to let them all disappear!! They are still uses for them..... Mark  |  IP: Logged Tobia Scapin Film Handler Posts: 3 From: Vicenza, Veneto, Italy Registered: Apr 2004 posted 10-22-2005 06:15 PM                    Hi, for SR it's better a CP65 than CP55 or are the same? Thanks  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-22-2005 07:39 PM                     If you have a CP65 with either Cat. 350s or Cat 300s...then the CP65 is substantially better. If the CP65 has a Cat. 222SR/A...then they are identical (same card). However, if you have a CP55 with an SRA-5 w/Cat 280T cards (or a Panastereo SR35) then the CP55 is identical to the CP65 with the Cat. 300/350 or superior to the CP65 w/Cat222SR/A  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.