Da-Lite HCCV or Stewart Firehawk SST? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 Old 01-04-2007, 11:28 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Hello Everyone!

I am new to this HT 'business', so please bear with me.

I have just purchased a Sony VPL-VW50 'Pearl' projector. 1080p, SXRD (aka LCOS), 900 ANSI Lumens. On my 'dirty' white living room wall it projects a 'Wow!', 120" wide image even on low lamp mode. Very cinema-like.

I am now trying to decide on a screen type. It must be an electric, ceiling-mounted, tab-tensioned, motorised screen, and I have narrowed it down to two choices (both 16:9, 133" diagonal, or 116" wide):

A. Da-Lite High Contrast Cinema Vision (HCCV), 1.1 gain - not cheap, but reasonably priced; or

B. Stewart Firehawk Sony-Stewart (SST), 1.1 gain, specially-designed for the Sony 'Pearl' projector - 50%+ more expensive than HCCV.

My environment is a white-walled room with minimal light control. I would be watching the projector mostly at night, from about 13-15 feet away. The projector will be ceiling-mounted.

Has anyone had experience with any of these screens and projector? If yes, your valuable feedback would be greatly appreciated and helpful for taking a decision.

Also, the other day I was watching an electric motorised tab-tensioned Stewart Firehawk screen at one of the local area dealers. What disturbed me were a series of horizontal wrinkles (4 or 5, like straight lines) spanning all across the screen that were very obvious on the projected image. The salesperson said this was normal for a rolling-up screen and that they came from the way the top of the fabric was attached, but I find this unacceptable for a $5,000 screen assembly. Would something like this be indeed normal?

Thank you.
Michael
Michael9009 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 Old 01-05-2007, 08:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Garman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Moon
Posts: 5,005
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Michael9009: Since you are using a White wall background which is fixed of course Why not go with a fixed screen and find one that has a bright white background with a higher gain.. There are motorized screens which are better on tension and don't show any of those curves etc.. of course there more expensive. I also own a Pearl and I am currently using a Vutec Brite White 1.3 gain, other good screens to use with that specific projectors are DA-LITE HP 2.8 gain, Stweart Studiotek, Vutec SilverStar or there BriteWhite. Best bet is call them and ask for samples that you can test, because bottom line it is going to be what your eye likes the best.
Garman is online now  
post #3 of 24 Old 01-05-2007, 03:01 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Garman (et al.),

My white wall is not intended for the installation of a 133" diagonal fixed screen. I am using it temporarily to project on until I get a motorised screen. I had to move an entire bookshelf to clear the wall. My intention is to install the electric screen so that it drops right in front of my 40" XBR CRT TV which, in turn, is in front of the living room window. So, I could not occupy a whole wall with a big screen and also an electric screen will stay out of the way most of the time. I know the drawback: more expensive, but I have no choice (I live in an apartment building).

I would assume that my wall - very slightly pinkish with a matte aspect - has a gain in the 1.0 range. Please do correct me if I am wrong here. I am very happy with the Pearl's picture on the wall surface, even on low lamp mode (it is very cinema-like). I gather that a grey screen with a 1.1 gain would not be much different, except for providing better blacks.

A local dealer offerred me very good prices for Da-Lite screens and he would also lend me his fabric samples, so I could decide on a specific material from Da-Lite. However, he does not deal with Stewart and I was wondering if the new SST screen would be (much) better than the HCCV, in addition to being at least 50% more expensive.

Regarding the horizontal lines/wrinkles, a Stewart dealer told me that this affects all roll-up screens and it is due to the connection between the fabric and the roller (a 'bump' that leaves imprints on the fabric). But this sounds strange to me, especially when it is about several thousand dollars screens. If any of you has experience with roll-up screens, do you also get these wrinkles?

Michael
Michael9009 is offline  
post #4 of 24 Old 01-11-2007, 04:14 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Noboby knows?...
Michael9009 is offline  
post #5 of 24 Old 01-17-2007, 02:38 PM
Newbie
 
unisys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
May i suggest a non tab tension screen. this will eliminate the panty lines across the screen & (dents) from the sides of the image area. All tab tension screens we have used here b-4 have the same problem. The fixed screen will provide the best results. Also take a look at Screen goo. A liquid screen coating that you can paint on the wall. The Sony vw50 will likely hot spot if you use a hi gain material. The Stewart Firehawk SST is low gain to compensate for the very bright lamp & short throw distance of the Sony VW50.
unisys is offline  
post #6 of 24 Old 01-17-2007, 05:05 PM
Member
 
dngrCharlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael9009 View Post

Garman (et al.),


Regarding the horizontal lines/wrinkles, a Stewart dealer told me that this affects all roll-up screens and it is due to the connection between the fabric and the roller (a 'bump' that leaves imprints on the fabric). But this sounds strange to me, especially when it is about several thousand dollars screens. If any of you has experience with roll-up screens, do you also get these wrinkles?

Michael

I just installed a Da-Lite 92" 16x9 HCCV, tab-tensioned electric screen with optional IR low-voltage module, 18" acoustically transparent drop and floating mounting brackets and it has "ladder marks" on it as well. I took a close look at the projector screen we have at work and it has the marks, too. Hearing that it is inherent in a roll up screen actually makes me feel better because now I know that it's not just MY screen.

I can't comment on how visible they are in use as I don't have my projector yet! I just ordered and Epson Cinema 400. I'll let you guys know whether or not those marks appear on the screen during movies after we get the projector set up (sometime next week, I'd guess).

Right now we are leaving the screen down as much as we can (it drops in front of our TV) to get rid of the strong vinyl smell and see if it reduces the marks.

BTW, the Acoustically transparent drop works really well. I can't really hear any difference with the center playing through it or not. I have a Marantz 8001 and used the Audessy setup with the screen down so it's EQ could compensate for it but I really couldn't hear a difference before.
dngrCharlie is offline  
post #7 of 24 Old 01-18-2007, 02:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Jerry Gardner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Charlie,

What is an 18" acoustically transparent drop? Is the bottom (or top) 18" of the screen acoustically transparent?

I searched the Da-Lite website and couldn't find a reference to this.

$300 HDMI cables? P.T. Barnum would have been proud.
Jerry Gardner is offline  
post #8 of 24 Old 01-19-2007, 02:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,444
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked: 333
I've owned 2 DaLite tensioned electric screens - a HCCV 92" wide and a Cinema Vision screen 106" wide cinemascope screen. I have not seen lines on either one - at least not while watching movies. If there is a line at the tension point it's just at the edge of the screen.

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is offline  
post #9 of 24 Old 01-19-2007, 02:31 PM
Newbie
 
alyourpal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Jackson,TN
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I too do not think the ladder marks are supposed to be there. I am a Home Theater rep--I see these screens all the time without any ladder marks at all. If I installed a screen from Da-lite that had them, I would be calling the 800 number at Da-lite. I bet they will fix the problem.

As for the original question---go for the Da-lite. It is the perfect screen for the Ruby. The only reason Stewart came out with the SST (Sony likes me screen) is to correct for a previous design flaw. This previous design issue was not an issue until using the Sony SXRD on it. Da-lite's material is desgined to work flawlessly with the SXRD--and it has since day one!

Pocket the difference and buy some extra DVD's, HD-DVD's, or Blu-ray's with it. Then kick back to enjoy your new 1080p experience!
alyourpal is offline  
post #10 of 24 Old 01-19-2007, 07:35 PM
Member
 
dngrCharlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Gardner View Post

Charlie,

What is an 18" acoustically transparent drop? Is the bottom (or top) 18" of the screen acoustically transparent?

I searched the Da-Lite website and couldn't find a reference to this.

The top (black) 18" part of the screen is acoustically transparent. You pay per square foot. The screen drops in front of an armoire and our center speaker is on top of it. We have up-lights on top of the armoire and, when they're on, you can see right through the drop.

If you call Da-Lite they will tell you what custom features they can do.
dngrCharlie is offline  
post #11 of 24 Old 01-21-2007, 05:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by alyourpal View Post


As for the original question---go for the Da-lite. It is the perfect screen for the Ruby. The only reason Stewart came out with the SST (Sony likes me screen) is to correct for a previous design flaw. This previous design issue was not an issue until using the Sony SXRD on it. Da-lite's material is desgined to work flawlessly with the SXRD--and it has since day one!

You are completely wrong, and you're a "home theater rep"? Stewart redesigned the screen for 1080P NOT for SXRD. Sony wanted to use the screen with a shorter throw so they desigend a version of the G3 with less gain (the SST) so that it did not hot spot at the shorter throw. The supposed "design flaw" you are referring to is much worse in the HCCV, anybody who has used or owned (such as I) one knows that it has a lot of sparklies and sheen and would be terrible for 1080P!!
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #12 of 24 Old 01-25-2007, 11:52 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Well, thank you all for the very interesting discussion.

But has anyone seen either the SST or the HCCV with a Sony Pearl? Is a 1.1 gain good enough on a 133" diagonal such screen? I am happy with the brightness of the image on the plain wall (although blacks are not as deep as I would like), but I am not sure whether these screens would bring any benefit to the image or actually degrade it.

How expensiveis to order samples and how responsive are the screen manufacturers to such requests?

Thank you.
Michael9009 is offline  
post #13 of 24 Old 01-25-2007, 12:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael9009 View Post

Is a 1.1 gain good enough on a 133 diagonal such screen? Thank you.

133" would be way too big for the Pearl and that gain.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #14 of 24 Old 01-25-2007, 03:44 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post

133" would be way too big for the Pearl and that gain.

Okay, so let me understand this properly. Does this mean that my plain matte wall has a gain higher than 1.1????? Because, to me, the 133" diagonal image from the Pearl on this wall looks just fabulous. Are you implying that the picture would be dimmer on either the SST or the HCCV (both having a 1.1 gain) than on my plain matte wall???... Please clarify this aspect. Thanks.
Michael9009 is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 01-28-2007, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mit07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post

You are completely wrong, and you're a "home theater rep"? Stewart redesigned the screen for 1080P NOT for SXRD. Sony wanted to use the screen with a shorter throw so they desigend a version of the G3 with less gain (the SST) so that it did not hot spot at the shorter throw. The supposed "design flaw" you are referring to is much worse in the HCCV, anybody who has used or owned (such as I) one knows that it has a lot of sparklies and sheen and would be terrible for 1080P!!

Why would the HCCV be terrible for 1080p? If it works good for 720p, why would it be worse on 1080p?

I want a Masquerade.
Mit07 is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 01-28-2007, 04:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 1,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael9009 View Post

Well, thank you all for the very interesting discussion.

But has anyone seen either the SST or the HCCV with a Sony Pearl? Is a 1.1 gain good enough on a 133" diagonal such screen? I am happy with the brightness of the image on the plain wall (although blacks are not as deep as I would like), but I am not sure whether these screens would bring any benefit to the image or actually degrade it.

How expensiveis to order samples and how responsive are the screen manufacturers to such requests?

Thank you.

As was said, that's a huge screen to be trying to use with a Pearl. I was concerned when I went from a Qualia to Ruby on my 110" firehawk, that the Ruby would be bright enough. I'm putting a Pearl into another install and sticking to 92" at min throw distance on a Da-lite HCMW model B deluxe.

OzHDHT is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 01-28-2007, 07:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mit07 View Post

Why would the HCCV be terrible for 1080p? If it works good for 720p, why would it be worse on 1080p?

because 1080P pixels are much smaller and the added added detail would be obscured by the sparklies and sheen of the screen. IMO it's not good enough for 720P either.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 01-29-2007, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mit07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post

because 1080P pixels are much smaller and the added added detail would be obscured by the sparklies and sheen of the screen. IMO it's not good enough for 720P either.


Is this a widely held belief or is this simply one person's opinion?

I want a Masquerade.
Mit07 is offline  
post #19 of 24 Old 01-29-2007, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mit07 View Post

Is this a widely held belief or is this simply one person's opinion?

search HCCV & sparklies and see for yourself...
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #20 of 24 Old 02-07-2007, 06:49 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Michael9009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzHDHT View Post

As was said, that's a huge screen to be trying to use with a Pearl. I was concerned when I went from a Qualia to Ruby on my 110" firehawk, that the Ruby would be bright enough. I'm putting a Pearl into another install and sticking to 92" at min throw distance on a Da-lite HCMW model B deluxe.

I honestly do not understand why certain people here try to convince me that a 133" screen would be too large for my Pearl. I thought I stated in plain and clear English earlier that I am perfectly happy with this size (and resulting quality) of the picture on a white-painted wall, even on the low bulb setting. It gives me a cinema-like feeling without those 'punchy', eye-straining brightness, although the image is still brighter than a cinema picture.

I was just curious if anyone would be able to estimate the possible gain value of a plain white wall. I would venture to guess that it is less than 1. In this case an HCCV should produce a brighter image than my wall.

I am projecting from minimum throw distance and my seat location is between 1x and 1.5x the screen width. Under these conditions, any higher gain screen would hot-spot and would also restrict the angle of view.

I have more than 200 hours on the bulb and I am perfectly happy with the quality of the size of the picture (133", on low bulb setting). I am not sure how much brightness loss I would see as the bulb ages, but there is always the option to zoom in and project a smaller picture on a larger screen. I suppose the other way around (i.e. projecting a larger image on a smaller screen) would be somewhat more challenging.

Regards.
Michael9009 is offline  
post #21 of 24 Old 02-08-2007, 04:02 PM
Member
 
sj2494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Looks like you know what you want to do but just want some one to justify you getting a screen that big in the end if your happy with the screen size and quality I say go for it with the screens you mention looks like you'll be doing better then sticking with a painted wall after all I've seen a ruby on 126 inch firehawk and while most people say this is to much screen for this projector I thought it was fine, its all a mater of personal taste. To me I'll go with a screen that's a little too big any day. Just reduce the size to like a 100 and watch a hole movie then work your way up and when you get to the point to were you start to miss the quality that's the size you should go with after all some people aren't as picky as others but I know what your saying 130 is really nice PS id do the stewart never saw a stewart I didn't like
sj2494 is offline  
post #22 of 24 Old 02-08-2007, 09:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
OzHDHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Antipodes aka Oz
Posts: 1,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael9009 View Post

I honestly do not understand why certain people here try to convince me that a 133" screen would be too large for my Pearl. I thought I stated in plain and clear English earlier that I am perfectly happy with this size (and resulting quality) of the picture on a white-painted wall, even on the low bulb setting. It gives me a cinema-like feeling without those 'punchy', eye-straining brightness, although the image is still brighter than a cinema picture.

I was just curious if anyone would be able to estimate the possible gain value of a plain white wall. I would venture to guess that it is less than 1. In this case an HCCV should produce a brighter image than my wall.

I am projecting from minimum throw distance and my seat location is between 1x and 1.5x the screen width. Under these conditions, any higher gain screen would hot-spot and would also restrict the angle of view.

I have more than 200 hours on the bulb and I am perfectly happy with the quality of the size of the picture (133", on low bulb setting). I am not sure how much brightness loss I would see as the bulb ages, but there is always the option to zoom in and project a smaller picture on a larger screen. I suppose the other way around (i.e. projecting a larger image on a smaller screen) would be somewhat more challenging.

Regards.

It does come down to what you can put up with, but the Pearl simply is designed to handle a certain screen size with it's bulb's 200 watt output.

Nothing is stopping you from going bigger, if you like it, fine go for it. I personally would even say, at times, that I'm not always entirely happy with the light output and resultant contrast I get out of my properly calibrated Ruby on the 110" original series (1.35 gain) Firehawk at rec throw distance. I often feel it's lacking the so-called 'pop' that I've more recently come to enjoy on both my new Pearl on 92" Da-Lite HCMW and 70" XBR2. I am tempted to change Ruby's screen to a Studiotek 130 style of Matte White to wring the extra performance out of it and do some extra wall treatment in the room. I would definitely(if it would fit) not consider trying to get anything larger in screen size though for it. Ok it might by comparison have 100 less ansi lumens than the Pearl out of it's 400w bulb, but that hardly means the pearls 200w bulb is miraculously going to make it proform better on a larger screen than the Ruby. I have a good base to comment on this from having had a Qualia prior to the Ruby and have done side by side comparisons.

You may want to note this comment about the lack of suitability of a Pearl for a person who wants to use a 120" screen in a dedicated HT in this thread posted yesterday: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post9717998

OzHDHT is offline  
post #23 of 24 Old 02-15-2007, 03:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,444
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked: 333
Quote:


search HCCV & sparklies and see for yourself...

I've never seen a sparklie problem on my HCCV. I have seen it on the Hi Power material and I have seen one occasionally on the Cinema Vision material.

I'll give an update after I get my new bigger HCCV screen and my Firehawk screen and my new 1080p projector. My H79 has sure looked good on the HCCV though.

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is offline  
post #24 of 24 Old 02-16-2007, 09:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 5,444
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked: 333
My new DaLite HCCV screen arrived last night - a tensioned DaLite HCCV - 106" x 59.5". Watched parts of several HD DVD's on it and the HD DVD U 571 last night. No tab tension marks, no hot spots, no sparklies. The picture looked marvelous, simply marvelous.

By the way - I ordered it from Jason here at AVS !!

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Call me on my direct line - 585-671-2972, 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday
Email me at craig@avscience.com http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SIM2, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, and many more!
Craig Peer is offline  
Reply Screens

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