HT of the Month: Extraordinary Evolution - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 216 Old 05-22-2014, 11:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 5,393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 462 Post(s)
Liked: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post

16:9 is so much better than Scope. They should all follow Jame's Cameron's footsteps and release their Blu-Ray in 16:9 format as most people have 16:9 tvs anyways.. and 16:9 on a large projector screen is so incredible compared to Scope... so much more immerssive...

I've got to say that I totally agree with you on this one coolgeek, just the other day my son wanted to watch Avatar and I had forgot that it was 16:9. We sit 11ft from a 120" screen and it was awesome! So immersive!

My Gear:

JTR Noesis 228HT (LCR)
Axiom Audio QS8 surrounds
Sherbourn PA 7-350
Pioneer VSX-21TXH
JVC RS45
Falcon Screens FVHD105
Dual PSA XS30's (gone but not forgotten)
jbrown15 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 02:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

I've got to say that I totally agree with you on this one coolgeek, just the other day my son wanted to watch Avatar and I had forgot that it was 16:9. We sit 11ft from a 120" screen and it was awesome! So immersive!

It seems that among film makers only james cameron gets it right in the technical aspect of things. He is like da vinci. Excelent in both the arts n science.
coolgeek is offline  
post #183 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
I guess it depends on what ratio screen you have. I have masking panels so the screen is always the same height but for 2:35:1 it is much wider so obviously I prefer that.

My argument would be if 16:9 is on a huge, awesome, immersive screen then couldn't you just take that same size height and expand the width of the screen for 2:35:1 and now it's even more immersive?

I feel like my eyes are better at seeing everything left to right but not as much up and down.
thrillcat likes this.
carp is online now  
post #184 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
desertdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Elkhorn, NE
Posts: 1,718
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

My argument would be if 16:9 is on a huge, awesome, immersive screen then couldn't you just take that same size height and expand the width of the screen for 2:35:1 and now it's even more immersive?
If you have a screen as wide as possible and it is 2.35:1, couldn't you take that same width and expand the height and now it's even more immersive? What did IMAX do? Expand the height or the width? wink.gif

My screen is as wide as possible for my room, but I was able to go with the height of 16:9. If I would have only gone 2.35, then my 16:9 stuff would have seemed very small.
desertdome is online now  
post #185 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 09:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I guess it depends on what ratio screen you have. I have masking panels so the screen is always the same height but for 2:35:1 it is much wider so obviously I prefer that.

My argument would be if 16:9 is on a huge, awesome, immersive screen then couldn't you just take that same size height and expand the width of the screen for 2:35:1 and now it's even more immersive?

I feel like my eyes are better at seeing everything left to right but not as much up and down.

It depends. For instance if you are height limited then you are right.

But if you are not height limited a 16.9 ratio is much more immerssive. When you are sitting at a distance where both the height and width of the screen is at your peripheral vision thats when you feel you are in the movie. Scope can never achieve height peripheral because in order to see the lenght of the screen the height will no longer be peripheral. It would then feel like looking thru a long window.
coolgeek is offline  
post #186 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 09:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdome View Post

If you have a screen as wide as possible and it is 2.35:1, couldn't you take that same width and expand the height and now it's even more immersive? What did IMAX do? Expand the height or the width? wink.gif

My screen is as wide as possible for my room, but I was able to go with the height of 16:9. If I would have only gone 2.35, then my 16:9 stuff would have seemed very small.

Exactly right. Imax had a video explaining why its important to achieve both height n side peripheral visions. Thus their aspect ratio which is close to the 16.9 ratio.
coolgeek is offline  
post #187 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 11:23 AM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I feel like my eyes are better at seeing everything left to right but not as much up and down.

Like this? tongue.gifwink.gif

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #188 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 01:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
Haha, nice Rob. biggrin.gif


But DD, if you took that even larger 16:9 size and added width to it.... etc....etc... tongue.gif

I see what you guys are saying, and yes I am biased because in my room I am height limited but not width limited (or less so).
carp is online now  
post #189 of 216 Old 05-23-2014, 02:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Really? with a -3db of 18hz?

Do tell ... cool.gif

My old Canton Digital 1.1:s were speced precisely that.

Cannot find a site with specs for them now, but I'd imagine something like Von Schweikert VR-8 being able to cope with it too but I won't claim that it does.

Focal Grande Utopia EM is speced to 18Hz @ -3dB as well (14Hz @ -6)

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is online now  
post #190 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 07:52 AM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

Haha, nice Rob. biggrin.gif


But DD, if you took that even larger 16:9 size and added width to it.... etc....etc... tongue.gif

I see what you guys are saying, and yes I am biased because in my room I am height limited but not width limited (or less so).

Seems like many (most?) movies these days are scope format so your are supporting the majority position. The room height issue is important and many of the HT's I see are basement spaces that are height limited. Being 6'5" and a bit claustrophobic, that would never work for me ... smile.gif

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #191 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 08:02 AM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

My old Canton Digital 1.1:s were speced precisely that.

Cannot find a site with specs for them now, but I'd imagine something like Von Schweikert VR-8 being able to cope with it too but I won't claim that it does.

Focal Grande Utopia EM is speced to 18Hz @ -3dB as well (14Hz @ -6)

I had the opportunity to hear the Focal Grand Utopias in a "high end" dealers treated demo room. They were nice but at $180K a pair, they are certainly beyond the grasp of the common man. My point is there just aren't many speakers that can handle todays music and movie content without separate subwoofer support. So at say $90K each for the Focal GU's vs $3.5K each for the JTR 215RT's, the JTR's represent an interesting and affordable option for those who have the space and inclination to try this approach. smile.gif

jbrown15 likes this.

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #192 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 12:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Well, while I do get your point, I don't agree that you want to be without subwoofers, as the best placement for subs and tops generally don't get along, thus they do best separated. I assume the room in question is one where the best sub placement happen to coincide, I have one friend with a similar situation, but in my book that's the odd one out.

With that said... I'm still very impressed with the cinema in question, so no complaints from here. Those speakers are totally unknown to me, so I have no clue to how they perform, and I would not judge anything by looks.

Rock on! cool.gif

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is online now  
post #193 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 12:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 241
There is a reason why LFE comes on a separate channel...

Even with a million dollar pair of speakers, you still need subwoofers separate for placement dependent frequency response issues. There may be a theoretical room in which the main full range speakers are placed in such a way that stereo imaging is perfect and bass response down to 20hz is perfect also. The odds of this theoretical room and speaker placement being "just right" is vanishingly low.

There are reasons why a vast majority of manufacturers dont put a subwoofer in their mains that will produce a linear bass response at 100-120db... The speaker box would get quite big as well.

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #194 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post

There is a reason why LFE comes on a separate channel...

Even with a million dollar pair of speakers, you still need subwoofers separate for placement dependent frequency response issues. There may be a theoretical room in which the main full range speakers are placed in such a way that stereo imaging is perfect and bass response down to 20hz is perfect also. The odds of this theoretical room and speaker placement being "just right" is vanishingly low.

There are reasons why a vast majority of manufacturers dont put a subwoofer in their mains that will produce a linear bass response at 100-120db... The speaker box would get quite big as well.



I've been down the rabbit hole and back of pursuing the flattest possible response/tweaking to the nth degree. I say "and back" because I recently said screw it and put all my subs back up front and you know what? I like it better this way even though it doesn't measure as well as having subs all over the room

Deserdome sent me a link of this video, check out from the 54 minute mark to 1:01 or so, this may explain why I prefer the subs back up front and very minimal eq.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164


I think many of us including me have over thought and over done the perfect placement/perfect eq thing. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but I think he's right when he says we don't sit there listening to sine waves, with real material a perfect response isn't as important as we think it is.
RMK! likes this.
carp is online now  
post #195 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 02:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I've been down the rabbit hole and back of pursuing the flattest possible response/tweaking to the nth degree. I say "and back" because I recently said screw it and put all my subs back up front and you know what? I like it better this way even though it doesn't measure as well as having subs all over the room

Deserdome sent me a link of this video, check out from the 54 minute mark to 1:01 or so, this may explain why I prefer the subs back up front and very minimal eq.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164


I think many of us including me have over thought and over done the perfect placement/perfect eq thing. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but I think he's right when he says we don't sit there listening to sine waves, with real material a perfect response isn't as important as we think it is.

Hahahahaha

I totally agree. Thats why I never respond to all the minute measurements people put up or how good audyssey etc are. Because I have tried many things and in the end I too like my subs upfront and just tweaking the sound by ear not equipment. Once I dialed it in by ear it usually trumps all measured type settings.

I wonder how a speaker would sound like if it were just voiced by a computer to a perfect curve.
coolgeek is offline  
post #196 of 216 Old 05-24-2014, 03:07 PM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I've been down the rabbit hole and back of pursuing the flattest possible response/tweaking to the nth degree. I say "and back" because I recently said screw it and put all my subs back up front and you know what? I like it better this way even though it doesn't measure as well as having subs all over the room

Deserdome sent me a link of this video, check out from the 54 minute mark to 1:01 or so, this may explain why I prefer the subs back up front and very minimal eq.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164


I think many of us including me have over thought and over done the perfect placement/perfect eq thing. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but I think he's right when he says we don't sit there listening to sine waves, with real material a perfect response isn't as important as we think it is.

That is a great point Carp and I completely agree. When I had my subs deployed front and back wall placement the room measured great but My rear subs produced a lot of bass energy from behind the seating location that I could feel. There were very few circumstances in a movie and never in a song where bas should be hitting you (yes, bass done right does hit you wink.gif) from behind. Now my front row measures reasonably well and sounds great. All the bass action is coming from the front as it should. Perceived sound quality is not science. smile.gif

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #197 of 216 Old 05-25-2014, 08:21 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,515
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked: 2114
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post

There is a reason why LFE comes on a separate channel...

Even with a million dollar pair of speakers, you still need subwoofers separate for placement dependent frequency response issues. There may be a theoretical room in which the main full range speakers are placed in such a way that stereo imaging is perfect and bass response down to 20hz is perfect also. The odds of this theoretical room and speaker placement being "just right" is vanishingly low.

There are reasons why a vast majority of manufacturers dont put a subwoofer in their mains that will produce a linear bass response at 100-120db... The speaker box would get quite big as well.



I've been down the rabbit hole and back of pursuing the flattest possible response/tweaking to the nth degree. I say "and back" because I recently said screw it and put all my subs back up front and you know what? I like it better this way even though it doesn't measure as well as having subs all over the room

Deserdome sent me a link of this video, check out from the 54 minute mark to 1:01 or so, this may explain why I prefer the subs back up front and very minimal eq.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164


I think many of us including me have over thought and over done the perfect placement/perfect eq thing. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but I think he's right when he says we don't sit there listening to sine waves, with real material a perfect response isn't as important as we think it is.

 

Very interesting. I have my subs up front as well. When I visited @notnyt his system sounded most profound, and he also has his subs set up in the front stage, and symmetrical. The whole notion of bass having a directional, visceral quality to it is probably controversial, but I generally agree with Paul on this point, and I came to this conclusion after talking a lot about bass with Keith Yates, who is of the other school—precise placement of subs throughout the room using computational fluid dynamics analysis.

 

When you take what Paul is talking about and apply it to @RMK!'s theater, the speakers and the subs are in the right place to create the desired effect. If the JTR's were deployed like typical audiophile mega-speakers, out in the middle of a room, then the bass would not be as tight, but in the current configuration it is easy to see why it works. As for the key to getting good sound from speakers that are up against the front wall? Controlled directivity. Perfect for home theaters with acoustically transparent screens. 

RMK! likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #198 of 216 Old 05-25-2014, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
I should add however, that I still sometimes like to use the mbm that's right behind my main LP when listening to music. It provides a nice aggressive punch/feel that I can't get from the front subs without cranking the volume much higher.

I do find the mbm distracting for movies so I rarely use it for that. I think part of that is with music I sit up right and for movies I recline.
carp is online now  
post #199 of 216 Old 05-25-2014, 08:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I should add however, that I still sometimes like to use the mbm that's right behind my main LP when listening to music. It provides a nice aggressive punch/feel that I can't get from the front subs without cranking the volume much higher.

I do find the mbm distracting for movies so I rarely use it for that. I think part of that is with music I sit up right and for movies I recline.

Dr hsu seems to think mbms right behind you is the best approach.

I haven't tried that but I currently I do have my OS next to my bed about 5 feet away and it can be distracting at times.

The only time I like the subwoofer close by is if I can't locate them. For instance when I used to own cambridge soundworks ensemble 4 which comes with dual flat subs which I place under the bed. It was fantastic.

My feeling is if u have enough bass power upfront you don't need nearfield. But if u have puny subs then nearfield may make more sense.
coolgeek is offline  
post #200 of 216 Old 05-25-2014, 08:47 AM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Well, while I do get your point, I don't agree that you want to be without subwoofers, as the best placement for subs and tops generally don't get along, thus they do best separated. I assume the room in question is one where the best sub placement happen to coincide, I have one friend with a similar situation, but in my book that's the odd one out.

With that said... I'm still very impressed with the cinema in question, so no complaints from here. Those speakers are totally unknown to me, so I have no clue to how they perform, and I would not judge anything by looks.

Rock on! cool.gif

I just spent an hour browsing your HT build Thread and found your description of the process and all of the anecdotes very interesting so thanks for sharing. I built out my room in under two months and you are in year three. Of course, we took very different approaches to our projects. You are taking an engineered room approach where I just relied upon surface level treatments to smooth out the rooms natural frequency response.

Your build Thread is interesting because it isn't just an information exchange, it is a personal story and as such very human and interesting. Good on ya, and I hope the end result is a enjoyable as the journey. cool.gif

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #201 of 216 Old 05-25-2014, 12:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nightlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 1,624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I just spent an hour browsing your HT build Thread and found your description of the process and all of the anecdotes very interesting so thanks for sharing. I built out my room in under two months and you are in year three. Of course, we took very different approaches to our projects. You are taking an engineered room approach where I just relied upon surface level treatments to smooth out the rooms natural frequency response.

Your build Thread is interesting because it isn't just an information exchange, it is a personal story and as such very human and interesting. Good on ya, and I hope the end result is a enjoyable as the journey. cool.gif

Thanks.smile.gif

Under construction: the Larch theater
Nightlord is online now  
post #202 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 08:48 AM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
I thought I would post a couple of photos of from the March GTG and the current HT setup:

This is AVS member desertdome demonstrating the JRiver media manager software plus, a better look at the ceiling acoustic panels:


This is John Hamm (CEO of Pono music) demonstrating the prototype PONO Player for the GTG Group (BTW, consensus was the PONO Player was amazing cool.gif)


The JTR RT speakers out from behind the screen and into the light:


Some of the GTG group listening to music:
its phillip likes this.

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #203 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I've been down the rabbit hole and back of pursuing the flattest possible response/tweaking to the nth degree. I say "and back" because I recently said screw it and put all my subs back up front and you know what? I like it better this way even though it doesn't measure as well as having subs all over the room

Deserdome sent me a link of this video, check out from the 54 minute mark to 1:01 or so, this may explain why I prefer the subs back up front and very minimal eq.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164


I think many of us including me have over thought and over done the perfect placement/perfect eq thing. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but I think he's right when he says we don't sit there listening to sine waves, with real material a perfect response isn't as important as we think it is.

You aren't wrong about any of your points. I find that once everything is setup once and done well, the subs dont really need to be tweaked again. 3-4 front placed subs work great too.

It all depends on how much one cares/obsesses about these details...

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #204 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post

You aren't wrong about any of your points. I find that once everything is setup once and done well, the subs dont really need to be tweaked again. 3-4 front placed subs work great too.

It all depends on how much one cares/obsesses about these details...


True - maybe someday I'll get to the point where I stop tweaking...and changing speakers for the love of god!! biggrin.gif
carp is online now  
post #205 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
Rob, do the 215's have grills? If so can you post a picture with the grills on when you get a chance? thanks! smile.gif
carp is online now  
post #206 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 07:40 PM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

Rob, do the 215's have grills? If so can you post a picture with the grills on when you get a chance? thanks! smile.gif

They are supposed to but I didn't get grills with mine. Frankly, if I had them I wouldn't use them cause I like the look of them just as they are... smile.gif

These are the first JTR's that I wish I could see. They are so imposing looking that I think it's kind of cool.

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
post #207 of 216 Old 06-01-2014, 08:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,075
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

They are supposed to but I didn't get grills with mine. Frankly, if I had them I wouldn't use them cause I like to look of them just as they are... smile.gif These are the first JTR's that I wish I could see. They are so imposing looking that I think it's kind of cool.

I understand, I won't use them either but I was just curious what they looked like. I'll ask Nate, but I bet he doesn't have them either! smile.gif
carp is online now  
post #208 of 216 Old 06-02-2014, 06:37 PM
 
pokeme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: gta Canada
Posts: 783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 486

Awesome theater. I liked that it isn't a dark dungeon like mine in the basement. Scares the kids a bit so I usually get first dibs...

 

I'd really really like to hear the full range jtr's!

pokeme is offline  
post #209 of 216 Old 06-04-2014, 09:24 AM
Member
 
davisnub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
who get's an invite to the gtg? carmichael is fairly close to where i live
davisnub is offline  
post #210 of 216 Old 06-04-2014, 03:44 PM
Señor Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by davisnub View Post

who get's an invite to the gtg? carmichael is fairly close to where i live

There is a Area Home Theater Meets Section under "Other Areas of Interest" and that is where I posted the announcement of the GTG. You are welcome to come by for a demo. smile.gif

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is offline  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
Home Theater Of The Month

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