Tale of two virtual reality headphones "inside": $ 400 Oculus Rift S reverb and $ 600 HP reverb

By the end of 2019, many leading virtual reality headset manufacturers seem ready to launch a new "Statement" product for PCs. This month, two helmets of this type are sold in stores: the Oculus Rift S (May 21, priced at $ 400) and the HP Reverb (available from $ 600).

In both companies' cases, the declaration of each helmet is a mixture of upgrade and compromise. Rift S sees Oculus taking two steps forward, two steps back, from its three-year-old Rift helmet, to establish a new "basic" PC-VR experience, particularly with active tracking of the hand. At the same time, Reverb aims to provide the most affordable "high resolution" VR headset ever designed – which, as expected, includes some imperfections, ranging from the obvious to the surprising.

Having lived with both headsets, I can say that the selling points of each headset are quite correct and do not change the game. They are both worth considering, as none of these recommendations is currently recommended.

HP Reverb: you say you want a resolution

Let's start with the HP Reverb, a headset that promises to exceed the screen quality and pixel density of the already impressive HTC Vive Pro and Samsung Odyssey. The total resolution of the reverb is 4,320 x 2160 handsets on its fast-switching LCDs.

Therefore, before HP agreed to send us a test unit, we were asked to confirm a minimum of GTX 1080 or AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 graphics card. Note that their last suggestion is designed for workstations, not for consumer computers. That's the goal. The reverb is specifically intended for use in business or development where the quality of the screen is paramount. this is not necessarily your helmet for high speed games or interactivity.

This is first highlighted by an awkward headband. Unlike the elastic flexion of the original Oculus Rift or rotary dial of the PlayStation VR, the reverb's strap is spartan. You must adjust three velcro straps, which are difficult to adjust when you wear the helmet. All this is related to a light but wide aureole, intended to fit at the back of the head, and comes with two over-ear speakers that are decidedly cheap, with a blurry material that you can expect from the camera. a $ 5 airplane helmet. (You can not detach them, but you can push them away from your ears and plug your own headphones with a 3.5mm jack.)

Yet this Spartan approach means that the strap system is under-engineering, a rarity in the sector. The helmet is much lighter in mass than the over-designed Vive Pro, which may be worth a disadvantage. Its halo design reduces the weight of your face compared to the original Rift. Plus, adjust it once on your exact head shape, and it's pretty simple to put on and take off from there.

The reversal feature of the reverb is fragile and knocks you in the head, so it is disappointing as an option "takes a look at the outside world". Its narrow interior is not particularly suitable for glasses. And if your interpupillary distance (IPD) is outside the "average" measurement of 61-66mm, Reverb's "Digital IPD" setting option will leave you unsatisfied from a comfort level.

All this to say: if your planned business / enterprise use case includes mainly professionals familiar with virtual reality, a shape and a head size perfect, everything will be fine. However, if you distribute them to a variety of beginner RVs, be prepared to ship them just to start the project.

Sweet spot, not so sweet result

For the Reverb screens, the pixel resolution of 4,320 x 2160 is incredible for the industry, well above the 2,800 x 1,600 measurements of the Vive Pro and Odyssey. (And that's even more than the Rift S, at which we will arrive.)

Reverb's "ideal" visibility, at the center of a user's field of vision, is the absolute winner in its price sector. After about a week of reverberation tests, I am now convinced that this is the number of pixels to count as "good enough" if you want to ensure discrete readability of small texts for the benefit of VR research, training and industrial design applications. (In the case of Reverb, this sales pitch is supported by the dense subpixel resolution of the LCD screens and the 90 Hz refresh.)

HP provided some examples of "professional" applications during my test period, and after wandering in a virtual replica of Helsinki and dissected a frog into a classroom, I understood Why. With my attention focused on front-end content, I could see the sales pitch of the Reverb clearly. HP has broken a significant line in VR quality at a reasonable price for businesses in 2019, and the rest of the warnings and cautions in this review can not erase that fact.

One of these caveats, however, is my use of "sweet spot" as a qualifier. I had a hard time understanding why the high resolution panel, overall, looked a little gloomy ("a bit" is not a very scientific descriptor, after all ). This problem became clearer once I configured the "Headset VR" headset, a hand-held WMR controller, a physical keyboard and a floating VR replica of the 2D desktop of my PC.

This confirmed my suspicions: the HP Reverb, like many other VR headsets, offers a clear vision in its central FOV, but is less successful at translating its peripheral pixels. Trying to read text on the periphery was a difficult struggle compared to the same text that appeared in the center. This was particularly easy to notice when I looked at the details spread across desktop windows and web browsers in 16: 9 format. Without a physical IPD slider with which to work, and only a "virtual" IPD setting option ", I did not know how to remedy this apparent vagueness. Countless attempts to readjust the helmet have not helped.

To be fair, being able to comfortably read the contents of the Windows desktop is its own revelation in virtual reality. It's almost impossible to make comfortably on the first wave of VR headsets 2016. But the layout of the pixels and lenses of the Reverb does not favor the content of the peripheral view, which leads to a strange problem similar to that of a valley: once some content is so crisp, why not be everything? What's more, why should the headset be so demanding on a PC's hardware if it blocks its default device pixels?

Some headphone manufacturers use sophisticated rendering, which reduces pixel resolution depending on what is displayed or how the user's eyes are tracked. But nothing effective happens here. Instead, the reverb renders, then loses, at least a quarter of its pixels, which I can say by clumsily moving the headset until only its angle pixels become clear.

LCD concerns

This clarity in clarity means that any comfort you might expect from a high-resolution headset gets weaker for long-term use. This is a pity because the fast-switching LCD panel allows up to 90 Hz refresh with lower pixel resolution than comparable OLED panels. However, the "halo" effect of his Fresnel lenses is particularly noticeable in this headset.

Plus, HP's choice of fast-switching LCD displays means the Reverb simply suffers from imprecise color calibration – at least, compared to the rich, perfect results you can expect from a calibrated OLED display . Part of the $ 1,100 Vive Pro price tag implies understanding that the content you will be importing will benefit from nearly uniform color reproduction. But the "blue" green "cold" of the Reverb, which is almost indistinguishable when you look at a standard CMYK color sheet, becomes apparent on a wider stage, especially the pastoral environment and false outer central spaces in Windows Mixed Reality and SteamVR.

In virtual reality experiences that rely on dark color mapping (such as the story-adventure book of Foam), the reproduction of the colors touches on the problematic. Everything in this game is darker and less alive than on the HTC Vive Pro powered by OLEDs. A "mura" effect visible on our test heads also resulted in uneven color reproduction over large pixel fields. In fact, it's probably the most intense mura effect I've ever seen on a consumer VR headset. (To better explain it, imagine a very wide background color for a website, supposed to be totally uniform and smelly.) Then, imagine that this aspect moves with respect to where you are. head your head in VR.)

Windows warning about the usual mixed reality

If you agree with somewhat imprecise color reproduction, high system requirements and an asterisk on Reverb's high resolution, you have an extra pill to swallow: its proper room tracking powers. This is the same as most Windows Mixed Reality headsets, which rely on two front-facing cameras and ensure proper tracking, provided you keep your hands generally in front of your face.

The short version: lighter applications like TiltBrush and Holiday Simulator works very well. (Just like the educational apps provided by HP.) Very active apps such as Beat Saber and Hacker Trainer Spaceon the other hand, have to compensate fairly regularly for poorly followed hands of reverb – as in every 45 seconds at high speed. Beat Saber a hand will disappear for a moment. Meanwhile, all games that rely on the action of the hands above and behind the head are irrelevant, as most WMR headsets (including the Reverb) do not have tracking sensors oriented towards the top.

Fortunately, the most popular VR rate provides for lighter tracking and therefore WMR-style tracking will work at the limit. But if the idea of ​​disappearing at random from the hands is too much of a headache for you, then you will want to offer you a more complete tracking experience.