6 Amazing High-End Home Theaters - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 06:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
6 Amazing High-End Home Theaters
By CE Pro Editors
Here are the award-winning home theaters from the Home of the Year Awards.

The winners of the high-end home theaters (projects from $75,000+) in this year's Electronic House Home of the Year Awards could serve as a primer for creating theaters that balance both flair and fundamentals.

They illustrate when it makes sense to hide speakers behind acoustically transparent screens - and in some cases per the homeowner's wishes, when it doesn't.



They show crafty ways of concealing projectors too - unless it's also a striking showpiece, like the kind SIM2 makes.

They demonstrate the art of using audio calibration software - but also the need for adding acoustical treatment on top of it.

And mostly, they show why there is still a demand for customization and dedicated home theater rooms, whether it's incredible design work, bulletproof sound isolation, sensor-triggered room functions and more.

Click here to continue.
Steve Crowe is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 07:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
JVoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 37
The 150K+ rooms were definitely first class. The 75K to 150K were for the most part, extremely overpriced. The screens were too small and weren't even scope. And yes, if you are paying 75K for one room, these CE companies should be providing a scope screen or at least one with masking. I'm sure someone will say "Maybe the customer didn't want a scope screen." Someone that pays 75K to 150K for a theater room that has beautiful architecture, Crestron control, THX Ultra or better speakers and components and Runco projectors, doesn't say, "Please provide me with a screen that is too small and make sure I still have black bars on the top and bottom of the screen when I watch any movie that has been released in the last 30 years". I have a hard time believing that these customers know the difference between scope and 16:9. I do believe they want the best product they can get that is also the latest and greatest. Otherwise, they would have just called the Geek Squad. All the rooms are very aesthetically pleasing, don't get me wrong. But, some of these companies could have provided their customers with bigger screens, not to mention that a scope screen, in my opinion, is visually striking when you walk into a room.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JVoth is online now  
post #3 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 07:29 AM
Senior Member
 
JustBusiness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVoth View Post

The 150K+ rooms were definitely first class. The 75K to 150K were for the most part, extremely overpriced. The screens were too small and weren't even scope. And yes, if you are paying 75K for one room, these CE companies should be providing a scope screen or at least one with masking. I'm sure someone will say "Maybe the customer didn't want a scope screen." Someone that pays 75K to 150K for a theater room that has beautiful architecture, Crestron control, THX Ultra or better speakers and components and Runco projectors, doesn't say, "Please provide me with a screen that is too small and make sure I still have black bars on the top and bottom of the screen when I watch any movie that has been released in the last 30 years". I have a hard time believing that these customers know the difference between scope and 16:9. I do believe they want the best product they can get that is also the latest and greatest. Otherwise, they would have just called the Geek Squad. All the rooms are very aesthetically pleasing, don't get me wrong. But, some of these companies could have provided their customers with bigger screens, not to mention that a scope screen, in my opinion, is visually striking when you walk into a room.

I completely agree. I am not building my room until I can afford a nice scope setup, who wants the bars in their "theater".
JustBusiness is offline  
post #4 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 09:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
coolcat4843's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 38
I would love to experience a home theater with 7 Procella Audio P860 Biamplified
Full-Range Extremely High Output Reference Speakers.

Including 4 Velodyne Digital Drive PLUS 18 18" Subwoofers.

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/s...audio-p860-pre

http://velodyne.com/digital-drive-plus-18.html

coolcat4843 is online now  
post #5 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 11:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 160
The whole "bars" thing is lost on me.

Really, they're inescapable, are they not? You either get them inherently with a typical movie on an 16x9 screen, or, you get them all around the "scope" image ...they're just composed of something other than screen material read: whatever you have surrounding the screen: masking/curtain, etc.

Just like the photo in the first post: "black bars" surrounding the entire image.

And yes I realize it affords for a larger screen, but what about folks who want to be able to watch 16:9 live broadcasts/sports and do not want to incorporate a masking system?

I suppose at these price points you could argue that cost and the kind the could implement would make them no-brainers.


James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is offline  
post #6 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 07:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,796
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 680 Post(s)
Liked: 414
Yeah, I agree about the $75,000+ theaters. They really had small screens. One was almost all wood paneling. Not appealing to me, but yet it's not my money going into it.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #7 of 24 Old 05-07-2012, 08:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
JVoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

The whole "bars" thing is lost on me.

Really, they're inescapable, are they not? You either get them inherently with a typical movie on an 16x9 screen, or, you get them all around the "scope" image ...they're just composed of something other than screen material read: whatever you have surrounding the screen: masking/curtain, etc.

Just like the photo in the first post: "black bars" surrounding the entire image.

And yes I realize it affords for a larger screen, but what about folks who want to be able to watch 16:9 live broadcasts/sports and do not want to incorporate a masking system?

I suppose at these price points you could argue that cost and the kind the could implement would make them no-brainers.

James

It's not so much the bars but the value. The 150K group got very high end theaters. The Bronze winner in the 75K group got a JVC projector, Marantz electronics, Universal Remote for room control and a small SnapAV screen. With that equipment package, this CE company decided to put in the most expensive seating I know of which is Fortress. At first I thought, those seats were out of place in that room. But the room is gorgeous, so, I must say that the equipment is what is out of place not the seating. Those people spent at least $75,000 and probably a little more. That is staggering. Especially for a room that has top of the line seating and nowhere close to top of the line electronics and screen. It is baffling to say the least. For at least 75K, one should expect a scope screen with masking I would think. If not scope, then a really big 16:9. I wouldn't say these rooms are ripoffs by any means, but it looks like these CE companies knew these clients had monster budgets and therefore focused on the nice cabinetry, curtains and the bottom line more than a properly equipped room.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JVoth is online now  
post #8 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 08:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chirpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Olathe, Kansas
Posts: 3,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Isn't it a big no-no to place a boxed speaker inside yet another enclosure? I would think those Monitor Audio speakers wouldn't sound their best in that situation, unless they're simply sitting on a pedestal behind a framed fabric screen. It's hard to tell from the photos...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 •
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

chirpie is online now  
post #9 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 11:21 AM
Senior Member
 
DRaven72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wolverine Lake, Mi
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Sorry, I thought any theater with WHITE all over that place was a no no and is IMO. It takes focus off the screen, reflects light. Specially that XMEN room with BIG WHITE circles all over. THEY STAND OUT LIKE THIS TYPE OF PRINT. All those rooms with white all over drove me nuts. The last theater in the 75K Bronze award was nicely done. Nothing over baring and very comfortable on the eyes. I agree, the equipment should have been better on that one, but the design was very soothing and comfy to me, not like there is alot going on, relaxing.
As for that first theater at at 150K Gold award, like that also except for the waste of wood on the ceiling. REALLY? You spend almost $50K on that alone with special cuts and lighting. Would have been better with the wood work on the outside of it(as a border) and the whole center open, all black with an inset star ceiling with constellations and a few "shooting" stars all hooked to a dimmer trigger to go off once movie started. Well again in my opinion that is. What ever shoots the owners skirts up. I didn't see one there that I would want built for mine, better out there I bet.

Cool Beans.
DRaven72 is online now  
post #10 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chirpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Olathe, Kansas
Posts: 3,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRaven72 View Post

Sorry, I thought any theater with WHITE all over that place was a no no and is IMO. It takes focus off the screen, reflects light. Specially that XMEN room with BIG WHITE circles all over. THEY STAND OUT LIKE THIS TYPE OF PRINT. All those rooms with white all over drove me nuts. The last theater in the 75K Bronze award was nicely done. Nothing over baring and very comfortable on the eyes. I agree, the equipment should have been better on that one, but the design was very soothing and comfy to me, not like there is alot going on, relaxing.
As for that first theater at at 150K Gold award, like that also except for the waste of wood on the ceiling. REALLY? You spend almost $50K on that alone with special cuts and lighting. Would have been better with the wood work on the outside of it(as a border) and the whole center open, all black with an inset star ceiling with constellations and a few "shooting" stars all hooked to a dimmer trigger to go off once movie started. Well again in my opinion that is. What ever shoots the owners skirts up. I didn't see one there that I would want built for mine, better out there I bet.

Remember, it's not a $150,000 theater, it's that or HIGHER. A good chance that ceiling, even at 50k (not likely) would not be 1/3 of the budget.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 •
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

chirpie is online now  
post #11 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 02:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
JVoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirpie View Post


Remember, it's not a $150,000 theater, it's that or HIGHER. A good chance that ceiling, even at 50k (not likely) would not be 1/3 of the budget.

That's an Erskine theater that he allowed people here at AVS to follow along. The equipment is absolutely top of the line and the room acoustics are sure to be second to none. The ceiling is a very unique design and plays a part in the acoustical treatment plan.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JVoth is online now  
post #12 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 03:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chirpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Olathe, Kansas
Posts: 3,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVoth View Post

That's an Erskine theater that he allowed people here at AVS to follow along. The equipment is absolutely top of the line and the room acoustics are sure to be second to none. The ceiling is a very unique design and plays a part in the acoustical treatment plan.

Worry not, I am aware. Dennis does great stuff for our little community. :-)


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 •
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

chirpie is online now  
post #13 of 24 Old 05-08-2012, 03:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
its phillip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: fort worth, tx
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 56
The 150K+ silver theater was the most attractive imo - I'd take the gear from the Erskine designed theater however. Anyway, all of the theaters are ridiculously beyond my budget of course and I'd be happy with any of em

its phillip is online now  
post #14 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 05:13 AM
Member
 
JamieT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dennis' one is $450K or thereabouts. The gear and the timber finishes I'd imagine make up a large portion of that money.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Level II

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Certified
Oz Audio Exorcists
JamieT is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 08:50 AM
Senior Member
 
dutchswan0311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Would not the aspect ratio of your screen be determined by the native resolution of whatever content you plan to watch the most? In the dinner theater that we are building, I considered going with 2.35:1, but then I realized that if we are going to display 16:9 HD content the most, all we are doing is giving ourselves a smaller screen. If I am limited to a 14' wide screen, it just makes sense to make it 14' wide and 8' tall instead of 14' wide and 6' tall. The former allows me to maximize the size for both scenarios, the latter makes the HD content smaller.
dutchswan0311 is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 09:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
desertdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Elkhorn, NE
Posts: 1,732
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchswan0311 View Post

If I am limited to a 14' wide screen, it just makes sense to make it 14' wide and 8' tall instead of 14' wide and 6' tall. The former allows me to maximize the size for both scenarios, the latter makes the HD content smaller.

I completely agree. I used a 150" diagonal (131" wide) 16:9 screen in my living room for 6 months. My maximum image width is 110" with my projector location. If I went 2.35 then my height would have only been 46" which I didn't like for all the 16:9 content. I ended up deciding to get a 16:9 screen with my maximum width. This made it 62" high. I got my Seymour AT retractable last week and will just mask the top of the image for 2.35 and wider aspect ratios.

I also found that I like the 2.35 and 16:9 images to be at different heights in order to relate properly to my eye level. Any of the regular masking systems don't allow for that. With my retractable and the ability to slide the image up and down using my HTPC and JRiver I can always get the image right where I want it.
desertdome is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 05:51 PM
Member
 
DarkVenture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Man was I the only one who was struck by how nasty the chairs in this one are?
http://www.cepro.com/slideshow/image/9957/

Those things look like curb garbage from the 1970s! I would take the white circles over them anyday!
DarkVenture is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 05:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,796
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 680 Post(s)
Liked: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVenture View Post

Man was I the only one who was struck by how nasty the chairs in this one are?
http://www.cepro.com/slideshow/image/9957/

Those things look like curb garbage from the 1970s! I would take the white circles over them anyday!

Too true! Reminds me of the saying: some people's taste is all in their mouths.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #19 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 06:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Reddig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Hays, KS
Posts: 1,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVoth View Post

The 150K+ rooms were definitely first class. The 75K to 150K were for the most part, extremely overpriced. The screens were too small and weren't even scope. And yes, if you are paying 75K for one room, these CE companies should be providing a scope screen or at least one with masking. I'm sure someone will say "Maybe the customer didn't want a scope screen." Someone that pays 75K to 150K for a theater room that has beautiful architecture, Crestron control, THX Ultra or better speakers and components and Runco projectors, doesn't say, "Please provide me with a screen that is too small and make sure I still have black bars on the top and bottom of the screen when I watch any movie that has been released in the last 30 years". I have a hard time believing that these customers know the difference between scope and 16:9. I do believe they want the best product they can get that is also the latest and greatest. Otherwise, they would have just called the Geek Squad. All the rooms are very aesthetically pleasing, don't get me wrong. But, some of these companies could have provided their customers with bigger screens, not to mention that a scope screen, in my opinion, is visually striking when you walk into a room.

You know what man your completely right. If your serious enough to throw down 75k plus on a dedicated theater your gunna at least have a masking system for 2.35:1 material, or more likely a scope screen with masking for 4:3 and 16:9. Totally ridiculous.

JBL Pro Cinema
Reddig is online now  
post #20 of 24 Old 05-09-2012, 06:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Reddig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Hays, KS
Posts: 1,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchswan0311 View Post

Would not the aspect ratio of your screen be determined by the native resolution of whatever content you plan to watch the most? In the dinner theater that we are building, I considered going with 2.35:1, but then I realized that if we are going to display 16:9 HD content the most, all we are doing is giving ourselves a smaller screen. If I am limited to a 14' wide screen, it just makes sense to make it 14' wide and 8' tall instead of 14' wide and 6' tall. The former allows me to maximize the size for both scenarios, the latter makes the HD content smaller.

Very good point.

JBL Pro Cinema
Reddig is online now  
post #21 of 24 Old 05-10-2012, 02:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
repete66211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kansas City area
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVenture View Post

Man was I the only one who was struck by how nasty the chairs in this one are?
http://www.cepro.com/slideshow/image/9957/

Those things look like curb garbage from the 1970s! I would take the white circles over them anyday!

Dedicated HT seating is awful all around--they look like LA-Z-Boys when they really don't need to. The fabric pattern on those chairs you mentioned are a bit gaudy, but then all of those theaters are pretty over the top. At least the red and gold velvet would be more comfortable than (p)leather, to say nothing of their acoustical benefit.

repete66211 is online now  
post #22 of 24 Old 05-12-2012, 08:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVenture View Post

Man was I the only one who was struck by how nasty the chairs in this one are?
http://www.cepro.com/slideshow/image/9957/

Those things look like curb garbage from the 1970s! I would take the white circles over them anyday!

I felt the same way. I just saw that theater and went "yeeesh!" recoiling somewhat. (I bet the chairs look better in person. But still...yikes!).

Like another poster I'm also mortified by the all-white theaters. Yes, the architecture and design can look nice in of itself...if I can forget for a moment that they are home theaters! But when you are designing a room for a function as specific as movie watching, especially in a projection based system, using all bright materials and decor is like shooting yourself in the foot. It seems so wrong-headed it just registers as a massive "fail" photo.

I'm more for minimalism and letting the image take over, so I can't get too hot and bothered about the gaudy excess type of theaters that seem to win these awards. But from a sheer building achievement sense, I can appreciate them.

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #23 of 24 Old 05-12-2012, 08:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

The whole "bars" thing is lost on me.

Really, they're inescapable, are they not? You either get them inherently with a typical movie on an 16x9 screen, or, you get them all around the "scope" image ...they're just composed of something other than screen material read: whatever you have surrounding the screen: masking/curtain, etc.

Just like the photo in the first post: "black bars" surrounding the entire image.

And yes I realize it affords for a larger screen, but what about folks who want to be able to watch 16:9 live broadcasts/sports and do not want to incorporate a masking system?

I suppose at these price points you could argue that cost and the kind the could implement would make them no-brainers.


James

That's right; at this price point I certainly would want masking available.

I have 4 way automated masking (didn't even cost me an arm and a leg and it works great, reliable, etc) and no, I experience no black bars whatsoever. Each movie and aspect ratio floats in a field of black, and so it always looks "finished" professional and cinematic. Which, again, I'd expect for 75g and upwards....

Rich H


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
R Harkness is offline  
post #24 of 24 Old 05-15-2012, 08:59 AM
Newbie
 
Avista's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
These are all real great points to make and it would be nice to be able to put those solutions into play when building and designing a dedicated theater. However, when working within a budget, one must decide how to balance the whole picture. In a complete remodel, there is more than just the Electronic side of things that has to be figured into the budget. There are interior designer fees, carpentry/contractor fees, electrician and other trades as well as all the paint, carpet, and materials that together add up fast and take a good portion of the clients budget. It is out job as custom installers to be able to offer the best we can in the electronics side as well as take into consideration the other trades and put it all together to work inside the clients budget. If the budget were higher than maybe we could provide auto masking, or even upgrade the rack equipment. maybe we could go with a better screen if we were able to just a little bit more in budget money, however we sometimes still have to do our best with what we are given. In the end, what the client gets is a great dedicated home theater that they asked for. There is always something that can be done better or a better piece of equipment, but as CEDIA certified installers and custom integrators, is it not our duty to provide the client with the best we can while staying focused on the client's needs, requests, and budgets? That is exactly what these installers and companies all did, I imagine, and the proof is the awards that they won.
Avista is offline  
Reply CE Pro & Electronic House Articles

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off