Pub Theater Build - 29x25 - Budget $60k - HELP - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 8Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 49 Old 10-04-2017, 09:38 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 27
I think you would need at least 2 si ht-18 in a marty. I just built both for around $850 with the 6000 amp. 2 more would cost you an additional $400 AS long as you have everything to to build/finish them yourself.

4 18" subs for around $1300? sign me up!
NickyB210 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 49 Old 10-04-2017, 11:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
Looking good. As for the boxes you could recycle the speaker boxes, but I would hold on to the receiver box in case you ever need to send it in for repair or want to sell it and upgrade at a latter time.

I like you setup, but I agree that you may want to go a little big on the screen and a little taller on the riser. The calculator I used said 8" would work, but when I drew it up it wasn't enough for me so I am going to 11" now. You appear to have plenty of head room to go higher, right? This is going be a fun room when you are done.

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html
Ladeback is offline  
post #33 of 49 Old 10-04-2017, 04:01 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahuzz13 View Post
I think you have a beautiful space to work with but I feel your screen is way to small for the room size IMO. Is that 135"d or width, you could probably go with a 150"d minimum which would give you 131"w of viewing. I would hate for you to be disappointed that you have done all this work and the screen now is too small. I would go with a taller riser to accommodate the line of sight since you have the headroom to do so. Check out Cold Water Creek Cinema Build, you don't have to do it like him at all, just that he has the space like you except the slanted ceilings, just a reference point that's all.
Thanks for pointing out the Cold Water build, it looks great. Maybe I will go for the higher riser. What is the advantage to a higher riser if the calculator predicts I need one that is 10" tall?

Also, if I want to have room for the bar and some lounge seating in the back, that screen is the biggest I can go and be at the recommended 15' distance for the front row. It is 135" diagonal in 16:9.

Thanks for the advice!
pumpkineater123 is offline  
 
post #34 of 49 Old 10-04-2017, 04:03 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ladeback View Post
Looking good. As for the boxes you could recycle the speaker boxes, but I would hold on to the receiver box in case you ever need to send it in for repair or want to sell it and upgrade at a latter time.

I like you setup, but I agree that you may want to go a little big on the screen and a little taller on the riser. The calculator I used said 8" would work, but when I drew it up it wasn't enough for me so I am going to 11" now. You appear to have plenty of head room to go higher, right? This is going be a fun room when you are done.
Thanks! I have 10 foot ceilings, so I can always go higher. What are the advantages of a taller riser?
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #35 of 49 Old 10-04-2017, 06:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkineater123 View Post
Thanks! I have 10 foot ceilings, so I can always go higher. What are the advantages of a taller riser?
You may not need it, drawing a line of site drawing based on your measurements in the calculator to make sure it works. Mine came up with 8" and it wasn't enough. Also for those shorter people who would sit on the back row may not see the bottom of the screen. If it is taller they could see better . I am going with 11" now.

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html
Ladeback is offline  
post #36 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 06:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 20
The only reason to go higher is if you go with a bigger screen, if the line of sight is good for the size of screen you have it probably will not be if you go with a bigger screen. I have gone with a 13" platform but because of height restrictions I have modified my second row chairs and built a 3 3/4" platform for each chair which will be perfect for the screen size I am going with 140"d(130"w x 55"h) cinemascope and I think your perfect screen size for your room would be 150"d (131"w x 74"h) which would give the same size picture in cinemascope as the 140"d. Again this is my viewing preference and everyone's is different, I understand you are thinking if the platform goes higher the people in the bar area will have a difficult time seeing the screen, that why you make it bigger lol.
Mahuzz13 is offline  
post #37 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 06:36 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahuzz13 View Post
The only reason to go higher is if you go with a bigger screen, if the line of sight is good for the size of screen you have it probably will not be if you go with a bigger screen. I have gone with a 13" platform but because of height restrictions I have modified my second row chairs and built a 3 3/4" platform for each chair which will be perfect for the screen size I am going with 140"d(130"w x 55"h) cinemascope and I think your perfect screen size for your room would be 150"d (131"w x 74"h) which would give the same size picture in cinemascope as the 140"d. Again this is my viewing preference and everyone's is different, I understand you are thinking if the platform goes higher the people in the bar area will have a difficult time seeing the screen, that why you make it bigger lol.
LOL, the scope vs 16:9 has been a big debate on here and I have given it considerable thought. The problem is that most of the media I watch (movies or TV) is streaming through a service like VUDU UHD or Netflix. I have a fiber connection and so the bandwidth for 4k is not a big deal. However it seems that all the streaming services mostly have movies that are in 16:9 format and there is no way to select a format when you rent or purchase a movie from them. So I am left thinking that I should leave the screen 16:9 unless I get into buying actual discs.

Thoughts?
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #38 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 07:02 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I wasn't suggesting to go cinemascope I was just saying the 150"d would be a nice size for cinemascope that's all. Go 16:9 and if you need to mask for cinemascope you can just go with a larger screen that's all.
Mahuzz13 is offline  
post #39 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 10:16 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Got it, thanks!
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #40 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 10:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
thrillcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Ames, Iowa
Posts: 815
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahuzz13 View Post
I think you have a beautiful space to work with but I feel your screen is way to small for the room size IMO. Is that 135"d or width, you could probably go with a 150"d minimum which would give you 131"w of viewing. I would hate for you to be disappointed that you have done all this work and the screen now is too small. I would go with a taller riser to accommodate the line of sight since you have the headroom to do so. Check out Cold Water Creek Cinema Build, you don't have to do it like him at all, just that he has the space like you except the slanted ceilings, just a reference point that's all.
I agree to go bigger, but I'm in the scope screen camp. Wider, not taller.
Ladeback likes this.

I love my iPhone, but it will never replace my turntable.

The Cinema 1858 Remodel Thread
thrillcat is offline  
post #41 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 11:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
I agree with @thrillcat , wider not taller. I have a 120" 16:9 screen, but after seeing scope screen done in a lot of the HT's in my area this is where I would like to go. Now I do watch a lot of sports on my current screen and watch shows from Amazon Prime and Netflix, but when I watch a Blu ray from Red Box that is in 2.35:1 it just doesn't seem big enough. Also I would rather have the black bars on the sides instead of top and bottom. It would be easier to use masking panels. Pumpkineater, you can go either way and if you get a projector with memory lens then it is not that big of an issue, from where you have your front row set you could go with a 2.35:1 screen that has a diaginal of 191" or a 16:9 screen that is 152" diagonal. That is 14' from the first person's eyes seated to the screen. The full screen would be 175x75 for 2.35:1 and 131x75 for 16:9.

Here is a couple calculators I use and what I came up with for your seating. Play around with and see what you like. You have a big room to work with. Now you are going to have to have a pretty bright projector for this big of a screen.



http://www.displaywars.com/191-inch-...-151-inch-16x9

http://www.screeninnovations.com/too...ting-distance/
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	16-9 vs Scope 1.PNG
Views:	20
Size:	116.4 KB
ID:	2293136  
pumpkineater123 and Mahuzz13 like this.

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html
Ladeback is offline  
post #42 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 01:07 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ladeback View Post
I agree with @thrillcat , wider not taller. I have a 120" 16:9 screen, but after seeing scope screen done in a lot of the HT's in my area this is where I would like to go. Now I do watch a lot of sports on my current screen and watch shows from Amazon Prime and Netflix, but when I watch a Blu ray from Red Box that is in 2.35:1 it just doesn't seem big enough. Also I would rather have the black bars on the sides instead of top and bottom. It would be easier to use masking panels. Pumpkineater, you can go either way and if you get a projector with memory lens then it is not that big of an issue, from where you have your front row set you could go with a 2.35:1 screen that has a diaginal of 191" or a 16:9 screen that is 152" diagonal. That is 14' from the first person's eyes seated to the screen. The full screen would be 175x75 for 2.35:1 and 131x75 for 16:9.

Here is a couple calculators I use and what I came up with for your seating. Play around with and see what you like. You have a big room to work with. Now you are going to have to have a pretty bright projector for this big of a screen.



http://www.displaywars.com/191-inch-...-151-inch-16x9

http://www.screeninnovations.com/too...ting-distance/

Thank you, that makes more sense. I like the displaywars calculator, very cool. Is there a calculator that recommends seating distance for 2.35:1? The screen innovations one uses Visual Acuity and I would prefer SMPTE or THX (based on viewing angle). The ones I found can only calculate based on 16:9.

Thanks again!
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #43 of 49 Old 10-05-2017, 05:39 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Hvac sorted, hoping to start framing soon




Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	20171005_094026_1507250302585.jpg
Views:	192
Size:	3.62 MB
ID:	2293334   Click image for larger version

Name:	20171005_150808_1507250323935.jpg
Views:	255
Size:	4.86 MB
ID:	2293336  

Last edited by pumpkineater123; 10-06-2017 at 05:00 AM.
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #44 of 49 Old 10-06-2017, 07:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkineater123 View Post
Thank you, that makes more sense. I like the displaywars calculator, very cool. Is there a calculator that recommends seating distance for 2.35:1? The screen innovations one uses Visual Acuity and I would prefer SMPTE or THX (based on viewing angle). The ones I found can only calculate based on 16:9.

Thanks again!
I found this one that is for 2.37:1 which is in between a 2.35:1 and 2.40:1. It should get you close to what you are looking for I hope.

http://tripp.com.au/screenscope.htm

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html
Ladeback is offline  
post #45 of 49 Old 10-06-2017, 11:54 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Thanks! So according to this AU calculator if my screen was 192" d on a scope screen, I would need to sit for the most immersive angle/closest distance at:

Maximum THX viewing angle 36º = 23.3'

Whereas the Screen Innovations calculator says I should sit at 14' for a 192" screen.

Maybe Screen Innovations just wants to sell us bigger screens?

After scratching my head trying to figure out if I should go CIH and how it works, this 1 minute video made it all clear to me:


I am now thinking I might go with a 176"D 2.35:1 screen which will have a 140"d 16:9 screen equivalent and get a projector with lens memory.

Going this route, when the screen has black bars on the side, and is projecting 16:9 content, will have an area of 8,375" sq.

However, on a scope screen is a different story. Here is how the area differs on a 176" scope screen for scope material VS projecting scope material onto a 16:9 screen:

Scope on Scope screen = 11, 160" sq
Scope on 16:9 screen = 6,277" sq

That is an amazing difference! I finally understand why I should go scope
Ladeback likes this.

Last edited by pumpkineater123; 10-06-2017 at 12:04 PM.
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #46 of 49 Old 10-06-2017, 12:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkineater123 View Post
Thanks! So according to this AU calculator if my screen was 192" d on a scope screen, I would need to sit for the most immersive angle/closest distance at:

Maximum THX viewing angle 36º = 23.3'

Whereas the Screen Innovations calculator says I should sit at 14' for a 192" screen.

Maybe Screen Innovations just wants to sell us bigger screens?

After scratching my head trying to figure out if I should go CIH and how it works, this 1 minute video made it all clear to me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me7pr5mstq8

I am now thinking I might go with a 176"D 2.35:1 screen which will have a 140"d 16:9 screen equivalent and get a projector with lens memory.

Going this route, when the screen has black bars on the side, and is projecting 16:9 content, will have an area of 8,375" sq.

However, on a scope screen is a different story. Here is how the area differs on a 176" scope screen for scope material VS projecting scope material onto a 16:9 screen:

Scope on Scope screen = 11, 160" sq
Scope on 16:9 screen = 6,277" sq

That is an amazing difference! I finally understand why I should go scope

On the Maximum THX viewing angle at 23.3', I read that as that as far out you can sit and still get a THX picture. you should be able to see that at 14' as I believe. Just my 2 cents on that.

On you your second part about going scope, that's how I figured it out after seeing all the scope screens in my area and that's what I wish I would have gone with years ago. If I would have gone with a 150" 2.35:1 screen the 16:9 screen would be a 120" screen like I have. So you get the best of both worlds with the bigger screen. I set at 11" now and on my 120" screen the 2.35:1 is around 113 instead of 150. That is a big difference. I am thinking of building for the scope screen and just use my current screen till I can talk my wife into letting me upgrade.

I think you choice to go 176 is a good one IMO. That will look great in your room.

Edit: Yes going with a projector with lens memory is the best way to go. I was wanting the Epson 5040, but the wife no way I was spending that much on a projector. So the JVC's is out for sure. I have seen the JVC-RS420 and 520. They both are very nice, but I like the brightness of the Epson's more for some reason. I don't think you can go wrong either way.

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html

Last edited by Ladeback; 10-06-2017 at 12:51 PM.
Ladeback is offline  
post #47 of 49 Old 10-11-2017, 06:09 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
pumpkineater123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ladeback View Post
On the Maximum THX viewing angle at 23.3', I read that as that as far out you can sit and still get a THX picture. you should be able to see that at 14' as I believe. Just my 2 cents on that.

Edit: Yes going with a projector with lens memory is the best way to go. I was wanting the Epson 5040, but the wife no way I was spending that much on a projector. So the JVC's is out for sure. I have seen the JVC-RS420 and 520. They both are very nice, but I like the brightness of the Epson's more for some reason. I don't think you can go wrong either way.
Is there a list somewhere of projectors used for CIH that automatically move the lens based on the AR of the input source? Not just lens memory, but automatically adjusting to a preset memory without fiddling with a remote...
pumpkineater123 is offline  
post #48 of 49 Old 10-11-2017, 06:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
VTstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 112
21' from a 135" screen? I hope you have these for everyone in the back row:



I know you've got it sorted out at this point, but I couldn't resist.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	s-l500.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	17.6 KB
ID:	2296220  
VTstang is offline  
post #49 of 49 Old 10-11-2017, 06:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ladeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 559 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Send a message via MSN to Ladeback
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkineater123 View Post
Is there a list somewhere of projectors used for CIH that automatically move the lens based on the AR of the input source? Not just lens memory, but automatically adjusting to a preset memory without fiddling with a remote...
Not that I am aware of. I believe most projectors will default on 16:9 and if you play disk with 2.35: or 2.40:1 it show it with the black bars on the top and bottom. I believe you use the powered lens on a Epson 5040/6040, JVC-RS420/RS520 to zoom the picture out to where your bigger screen is so it is larger and fills the screen. You then program a mode button on the remote for that screen size you want. The 5040 does have a auto setting for detecting what it is being feed from a source, but I don't think it will scale it up or down automatically. This would be a good question in the Epson 5040 projector thread or the JVC-RS420 projector thread.

Klipsch KPS-400’s FR/FL with built in 15” 300 watt side firing subs, RC-7 Center, RS-3 Surrounds.
Integra DHC-60.5, 5- Marantz MA700 Mono Blocks, Pioneer DV-F727 301 Disk DVD CD Changer, Pioneer DVL-909 Laserdisc/DVD/CD Player, Sony PS3.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...ck-cinema.html
Ladeback is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Dedicated Theater Design & Construction

Tags
atmos , build , elac , Marantz , theater

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