Originally Posted by SiZMiK
I have been going back and forth and cant commit to a screen. I originally thought the HP then the Seymour then the HP and now I'm back to square one.
The HP I think with the middle seat will be fine but the outer seats will start to see a drop in brightness. I put the sample up to the middle of my current screen, sat face on which looked great, then moved 2-3 paces to the right and it was back to normal brightness. That is not going to work. I dont know how other people put up with it but its definately not suitable for viewing at a fairly close range (roughly 3M away)
But I love the brightness of it, is there any other screen material with a high gain but a wider viewing angle ? I like the Seymour, but when you look at the HP and then the Seymour its dull in comparison, that does not take anything away from the Seymour itself as I think its very good.
Do you have any hair left?
It can be maddening to decide. At times like this I do two things: start writing down the pros and cons of each; then take my time deciding. I will take a few days to process all the factors so that the stress level is low. Somehow, a good decision is distilled in the end. "Stay calm and carry on."
I would say that you have two very different screens in contention here. Both make very good pictures, but are designed to meet certain needs and/or performance goals. I think you would be wise to reverse the direction you are on. Rather than picking a product and building your priorities around it/them, you would be wise to priortize your performance expectations, then select the product(s) that will create the performance you expect.
Deciding how close you want to sit based on the experience you will have is a better criterea for chosing a screen than the visibility of the weave in an AT screen. Ten feet from a 100" wide 1.78 screen will give you about a 40 degree viewing angle. That's just a few degrees shy of the SMPTE nominal angle and renders a good experience. I regularly use either Seymour XD or Dragonfly Acoustiweave at 10' with no problem. Okay, if you have 20/10 distant vision, you might.
On the same approach of achieving a nominal experience, screen/sound association (or vice versa) has a strong impact on the experience. When the screen is large enough to occupy as much of our field of vision as it does in your case at 10', then it is very obvious when the center speaker is below or above the screen; the disassociation of voices from the speaking person is very obvious. For that reason, I am a very strong propenent of AT screens. The left and right can flank the screen or be just inside the image edge and work great, but having that center near the center of the screen is natural and impressive.
Another case for AT screens is that it gives you the opportunity to utilize a bit of acoustic treatment behind the screen between your speakers. A non-AT screen is a significant reflector of sound above about 500 Hz or so.
A factor that you will have to evaluate is whether the seating at 10' puts you in a nominal acoustic position for LF. That is a factor of room proportions and placement. Sometimes the two (nominal location for image vs nominal location for LF acoustic modes) come in conflict in small rooms. Hopefully, there is a reasonable compromise, but we don't know much about your room.
Finally, regarding the HP screen, one thing that has not been mentioned is throw ratio in relation to angular reflection and your seating location. The farther your throw is, the less sensitivity to projector height. It's all about angle. At a 15' throw and a 10' viewing distance, the angular reflectance "window" will be small. If your throw is from >
20', it is less sensitive to placement and a gain screen will appear more uniform in luminance.