or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

235 Build - Page 5

post #121 of 544
Plan looks good to me. Depending on your front row distance from the screen, you could get away with shaving a few inches off the riser if needed. I just realized our room dimensions are extremely similar (yours being just a couple inches larger in each direction). My plans call for the riser to be 6' 10" deep. IIRC, common wisdom on here says it should be at minimum 6' 6" if you plan to have full reclining seats, so you are covered there.

Wish I could help you on the GOM question. I'm still a good month or so away from that phase of my build.
post #122 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Is there a downside to having the PJ above the height of the screen if using one of these?

I talked to 235 about his ceiling height and projector mounting in a PM, but others can't see, so I will re-iterate the parts relevant to this converstion. I'll start with your question. I heard that when using a shift, you lose a little on the picture, but if that is true, I haven't noticed. I think I had read this before, and I wasn't sure if it was brightness or sharpness or what. I'm pretty near max shift and my picture looks great to me (On a VW95ES) so if it isn't just some wive's tale, then I don't notice it.

As for the previous posts about being inside of the frame, you should really pay attention to the manual. (It has throw distances and multipliers for how far the projector can be shifted, but it isn't perfect) On my theater, I have a soffit (10" high), and a screen below the soffit. (I think the top of my velvet SMX frame is 6" below the soffit bottom, and the frame itself is like 2" or so wide) My projector was a Sony VW95ES and I mounted it to the ceiling directly with I believe a 3" pipe to the Chief mount. Since I have a widescreen, I started by making sure my widescreen picture fit, which was using the projector in a zoomed state (Since the 16:9 would have to un-zoom to fit) but what ended up happening is when I zoomed out, the picture needed to be moved even further down to fit the 16:9 picture, which I couldn't do since I hit the limit of the lens shift. I wasn't THAT far off the top border of the screen either. It just had to do with the height difference in combination with the throw. I wanted a closer throw to make sure I got increased lumens on the screen. So I had to use a 10" drop pipe instead of the 3" one so that the projector was just outside of the border of the screen. YES, it can be placed outside of the frame, but it wasn't by much in the end. It ended up dropping the lens just below the soffit, very near the top border, and this allowed me to zoom out, and shift down, to fit a 16:9 picture correctly centered on the screen.

Another thing to keep in mind, is that there is a slight flaw in the Sony's lens memory feature, which I believe is directly related to being near the maximum allowable shift. The way the sony does it's shift is that it goes to all of the maximum areas (Up, Down, Left, Right) and then clicks back to where it should be. But I think if your end position is too close to the max shift the lens-memory ends up being off by a few ticks. My workaround was actually setting the memory in a position that was incorrectly off by a few ticks for my 16:9 setting and then when recalling the memory it made it close to the real place. This only happens when going to 16:9 mode from 2.35:1 mode, which is near the maximum limit of the lens shift.
Edited by damelon - 7/11/12 at 7:10am
post #123 of 544
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWCR View Post

Plan looks good to me. Depending on your front row distance from the screen, you could get away with shaving a few inches off the riser if needed. I just realized our room dimensions are extremely similar (yours being just a couple inches larger in each direction). My plans call for the riser to be 6' 10" deep. IIRC, common wisdom on here says it should be at minimum 6' 6" if you plan to have full reclining seats, so you are covered there.
Wish I could help you on the GOM question. I'm still a good month or so away from that phase of my build.

Front row eyeballs are 11' from screen. I may tweak the depth of the riser a bit once my acoustic plans are done. I also noticed the similarities between our rooms and have been following along....although I don't get any AVS email notifications since the site upgrade. I noticed you have a right-swing door. Was that a conscious decision? Advantages?
post #124 of 544
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by damelon View Post

I talked to 235 about his ceiling height and projector mounting in a PM, but others can't see, so I will re-iterate the parts relevant to this converstion. I'll start with your question. I heard that when using a shift, you lose a little on the picture, but if that is true, I haven't noticed. I think I had read this before, and I wasn't sure if it was brightness or sharpness or what. I'm pretty near max shift and my picture looks great to me (On a VW95ES) so if it isn't just some wive's tale, then I don't notice it.
As for the previous posts about being inside of the frame, you should really pay attention to the manual. (It has throw distances and multipliers for how far the projector can be shifted, but it isn't perfect) On my theater, I have a soffit (10" high), and a screen below the soffit. (I think the top of my velvet SMX frame is 6" below the soffit bottom, and the frame itself is like 2" or so wide) My projector was a Sony VW95ES and I mounted it to the ceiling directly with I believe a 3" pipe to the Chief mount. Since I have a widescreen, I started by making sure my widescreen picture fit, which was using the projector in a zoomed state (Since the 16:9 would have to un-zoom to fit) but what ended up happening is when I zoomed out, the picture needed to be moved even further down to fit the 16:9 picture, which I couldn't do since I hit the limit of the lens shift. I wasn't THAT far off the top border of the screen either. It just had to do with the height difference in combination with the throw. I wanted a closer throw to make sure I got increased lumens on the screen. So I had to use a 10" drop pipe instead of the 3" one so that the projector was just outside of the border of the screen. YES, it can be placed outside of the frame, but it wasn't by much in the end. It ended up dropping the lens just below the soffit, very near the top border, and this allowed me to zoom out, and shift down, to fit a 16:9 picture correctly centered on the screen.
Another thing to keep in mind, is that there is a slight flaw in the Sony's lens memory feature, which I believe is directly related to being near the maximum allowable shift. The way the sony does it's shift is that it goes to all of the maximum areas (Up, Down, Left, Right) and then clicks back to where it should be. But I think if your end position is too close to the max shift the lens-memory ends up being off by a few ticks. My workaround was actually setting the memory in a position that was incorrectly off by a few ticks for my 16:9 setting and then when recalling the memory it made it close to the real place. This only happens when going to 16:9 mode from 2.35:1 mode, which is near the maximum limit of the lens shift.

I don't look forward to my PJ selection eek.gif I didn't realize there could be so many subtle problems that might come up. My current thoughts are to go with the same zooming approach but I wonder how much the cheaper anamorphic lenses might cost. Maybe that would make some of these setup problems go away?
post #125 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

I don't look forward to my PJ selection eek.gif I didn't realize there could be so many subtle problems that might come up. My current thoughts are to go with the same zooming approach but I wonder how much the cheaper anamorphic lenses might cost. Maybe that would make some of these setup problems go away?

It's been suggested to me that even with an anamorphic lens, there can be geometric distortion with using the full maximum of vertical lens shift. I got the JVC RS45. I was told not to use the entire range of the shift, and therefore I'm going to move my screen higher up to 36" off the ground. This will allow me to put the projector box a little higher (it's going to be directly over the heads of the second row viewers so I didn't want it too low). The screen that high will make the first row viewing a little worse, but a number of people on here have screens that high with similar viewing distances. Plus, if using recliners, the angles won't be quite as bad since the viewer will be at least partially reclined when watching.
post #126 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

Front row eyeballs are 11' from screen. I may tweak the depth of the riser a bit once my acoustic plans are done. I also noticed the similarities between our rooms and have been following along....although I don't get any AVS email notifications since the site upgrade. I noticed you have a right-swing door. Was that a conscious decision? Advantages?
It was more of a "that just makes the most sense" decision. Code says that doors to enclosed rooms need to open into the room, so you don't become trapped in an emergency situation if something falls in front of the outside of the door. Since it opened into the room, and the wall outside of the door is so close to the right side, it made the most sense from both an aesthetic and traffic flow point of view to me.
post #127 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

I don't look forward to my PJ selection eek.gif I didn't realize there could be so many subtle problems that might come up. My current thoughts are to go with the same zooming approach but I wonder how much the cheaper anamorphic lenses might cost. Maybe that would make some of these setup problems go away?

The zooming method is used because of how much cheaper it is than lenses, not the other way around. The best quality setup would be to use a lens, but usually the lens setup costs more than the projector does. It's personal preference. The biggest difference is that a lens allows a longer throw, has a brighter picture, and uses all pixels in a widescreen setup instead of the zoom method which throws the black bars (which are still being projected) off the screen. I use a zoom with the sony and I think the picture looks gorgeous widescreen. You just need to make sure you calculate all of the throw/height/zoom distances to make sure it will work first. Though a lens might look better, I honestly don't know if I would even notice.

As for projector selection, this gave me a REAL headache. I loved the picture of the sony HW30, but it had no lens memory, which if using the zoom method, is pretty much required. I read so many reviews on every projector, including things like Epson, Sharp, Mitsubishi, but in the end it was down to the popular projectors which had lens memory. The Panny 7000, JVC-RS45, and the Sony 95. I really looked into everything, like lumen output, contrast, how visible the iris was, motion handling, etc. In the end the Sony had them all and with AVS pricing, wasn't a bad deal. The motion handling on the Sony is very very good. On shows like Planet Earth it makes it look like you are physically there. For 3D viewing, it's hard to watch without the motion handling on. But with it, it is beautiful. Now I haven't watched that much 3D. I enjoy it, and it's fun, but in reality I use it very little for 3d content. The sony does come with 2 pair of glasses which work well and require no additional parts, but I got monster vision glasses anyway, both of which have had issues with charging, but they look better and are more comfortable. The PQ of the Sony is superb as well. So I have no regrets at all with my projector selection. The SMX screen I purchased was also very nice, even with the low level gain, (I think it is 1.1 or something for the cineweave material) it is very bright.
Edited by damelon - 7/12/12 at 9:21am
post #128 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by damelon View Post

I talked to 235 about his ceiling height and projector mounting in a PM, but others can't see, so I will re-iterate the parts relevant to this converstion. I'll start with your question. I heard that when using a shift, you lose a little on the picture, but if that is true, I haven't noticed. I think I had read this before, and I wasn't sure if it was brightness or sharpness or what. I'm pretty near max shift and my picture looks great to me (On a VW95ES) so if it isn't just some wive's tale, then I don't notice it.
As for the previous posts about being inside of the frame, you should really pay attention to the manual. (It has throw distances and multipliers for how far the projector can be shifted, but it isn't perfect) On my theater, I have a soffit (10" high), and a screen below the soffit. (I think the top of my velvet SMX frame is 6" below the soffit bottom, and the frame itself is like 2" or so wide) My projector was a Sony VW95ES and I mounted it to the ceiling directly with I believe a 3" pipe to the Chief mount. Since I have a widescreen, I started by making sure my widescreen picture fit, which was using the projector in a zoomed state (Since the 16:9 would have to un-zoom to fit) but what ended up happening is when I zoomed out, the picture needed to be moved even further down to fit the 16:9 picture, which I couldn't do since I hit the limit of the lens shift. I wasn't THAT far off the top border of the screen either. It just had to do with the height difference in combination with the throw. I wanted a closer throw to make sure I got increased lumens on the screen. So I had to use a 10" drop pipe instead of the 3" one so that the projector was just outside of the border of the screen. YES, it can be placed outside of the frame, but it wasn't by much in the end. It ended up dropping the lens just below the soffit, very near the top border, and this allowed me to zoom out, and shift down, to fit a 16:9 picture correctly centered on the screen.
Another thing to keep in mind, is that there is a slight flaw in the Sony's lens memory feature, which I believe is directly related to being near the maximum allowable shift. The way the sony does it's shift is that it goes to all of the maximum areas (Up, Down, Left, Right) and then clicks back to where it should be. But I think if your end position is too close to the max shift the lens-memory ends up being off by a few ticks. My workaround was actually setting the memory in a position that was incorrectly off by a few ticks for my 16:9 setting and then when recalling the memory it made it close to the real place. This only happens when going to 16:9 mode from 2.35:1 mode, which is near the maximum limit of the lens shift.

Sorry, I did not see the other question until you answered it. After polishing a lens is usually best in the middle and not as good toward the edges. That is why it is recommended to use less lens shift, so that you are shooting through the middle. That is not to say that the image will be degraded when shooting close to the edge of the lens, just that it could be. There are a couple other factors, but this is the main reason.
Reply
Reply
post #129 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Sorry, I did not see the other question until you answered it. After polishing a lens is usually best in the middle and not as good toward the edges. That is why it is recommended to use less lens shift, so that you are shooting through the middle. That is not to say that the image will be degraded when shooting close to the edge of the lens, just that it could be. There are a couple other factors, but this is the main reason.

Thanks for that, my brain tends to fail me when I need it most.
post #130 of 544
Thread Starter 
I'm looking into fabric frames vs plastic track. I'm leaning towards the track. Can anyone point me to a build thread that has done the track and shows some of the gotchas. Although track might be more expensive in material costs, I'm hiring for the construction so paying someone to make the wooden panels probably wouldn't end up any cheaper. Thoughts?
post #131 of 544
Thread Starter 
I ordered my 235 screen (had to because I couldn't rename my thread wink.gif ) 120" wide AT.
I considered the SMX and the Seymour but ended up buying the Jamestown (with the Seymour material).
I couldn't pass up on the savings. From everything I read and given my seating distance the Seymour material should be as good or better than any other AT material.
This was an interesting read: http://accucalhd.com/documents/accucal_front_projection_screen_report.pdf

The Jamestown needs 2 vertical supports. James will position those supports wherever I want them. I don't have speakers yet so how wide apart should I separate them? 24", 30" apart?
post #132 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

I ordered my 235 screen (had to because I couldn't rename my thread wink.gif ) 120" wide AT.
I considered the SMX and the Seymour but ended up buying the Jamestown (with the Seymour material).
I couldn't pass up on the savings. From everything I read and given my seating distance the Seymour material should be as good or better than any other AT material.
This was an interesting read: http://accucalhd.com/documents/accucal_front_projection_screen_report.pdf
The Jamestown needs 2 vertical supports. James will position those supports wherever I want them. I don't have speakers yet so how wide apart should I separate them? 24", 30" apart?

Are you doing a masking system?
post #133 of 544
When you say Jamestown, do they now offer their screens with Seymour AT material?
post #134 of 544
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rs691919 View Post

Are you doing a masking system?

I likely will at some point, not sure of exactly how yet. It might be DIY or I'll take a closer look at manual solutions like the Seymour masking that is based on magnets I believe.
post #135 of 544
Thread Starter 
Yup, they order the Seymour Center Stage XD material, tilt and cut it to fit in their frame.
post #136 of 544
Mine sharing cost and savings info?
post #137 of 544
Thread Starter 
Sent you a PM.
post #138 of 544
Got it...Thanks!

Let us know how the quality is and how easy/hard it is to assemble. Take lots of pictures too!!
post #139 of 544
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbraden32 View Post

Got it...Thanks!
Let us know how the quality is and how easy/hard it is to assemble. Take lots of pictures too!!

I will, but if you're impatient here are a couple of people who have already done it:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/manufactured-screens/44058-jamestown-home-theater-screen-review.html
http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-theater-design-construction/32573-pimp-my-garage-19.html#post447979
post #140 of 544
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

I'm looking into fabric frames vs plastic track. I'm leaning towards the track. Can anyone point me to a build thread that has done the track and shows some of the gotchas. Although track might be more expensive in material costs, I'm hiring for the construction so paying someone to make the wooden panels probably wouldn't end up any cheaper. Thoughts?

No suggestions on this??
post #141 of 544
I think Moggie went throught the same debate in the Old Vic thread. I am personally only stretching fabric across the back wall to hide 4" thick OC 703. It's going to be a little complex because I want to have picture frame moulding sitting on top of the fabric, so I'm going to have to plan ahead with furring strips to make it all work. The main advantages I see of track is that you don't have to staple, don't have to worry about hiding staples, and you can take it all down at a later date and re-do it. I think for my application, it will actually be a little bit easier to stretch and staple -- I figure if I ever want to redo it, I'm going to have to buy new cloth anyway.
post #142 of 544
Thread Starter 
Time to start looking into speakers and amps. It's been 20 yrs since I last bought a receiver and speakers eek.gif
I'm starting from scratch and need 7.x setup. This seems a bit overwhelming. Where do I start?
post #143 of 544
I bet everyone who replies will recommend something different. I don't have professional advice to give you myself but I bet if you post a budget for the speakers and for the receiver and possible amplifier people will be able to give you much better ideas.

I hesitate to post anything because I need help myself and I apologize if you know everything that follows.

Professionals have recommended to me the Denon AVR 4311 and I went ahead and bought one. There is a dedicated thread here on AVS with tons of info on it. It has the latest Audessey XT 32 and can be upgraded to the Pro version for $150 if you are going to have a professional calibrator come in.

I have the Emotiva XPA-5 and I feel that for the money it is a good amplifier.

Assuming that your room is HT first and music second you really need something that can easily do reference with clarity and provide amazing dynamics. Ideally you have a front row with 3 identical speakers (not a horizontal center channel). That most likely means something with fairly high sensitivity. Your center channel will be going through the AT screen I imagine and this will require a bit of EQ.

I am going with Triad in wall Bronze surrounds to put in my columns.

I currently have Klipsch RF-83's but I may go with something else budget allowing.

Other capable brands are Triad, Procella, and M&K.

If you want cheap it is hard to beat CHT SHO-10's, and ED Cinema 12's. Step up in price and performance to the JTR Triple 8's. Up from there to the Seaton Catalyst line. It just goes on and on.

I would try to audition the speakers in your room if possible and make sure they are EQ'd when you do. Have fun!

(You did not mention subs but I would give bass some proper attention. I went with the JTR Orbit Shifter. The Seaton Submersive HP is excellent as well. Lots of choices. DIY will save you a bundle if you run out of money but really go all out on this one.)
post #144 of 544
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the input.

I'm still struggling with the HT vs music priority. I'm not sure how much of a sacrifice is made to one when the other is the priority. Can anyone help describe or quantify the differences between the two priorities?
My "budget" is kinda flexible. At this stage I'm thinking $10k for speakers, subs and amps but willing to move that in either direction based on my perceived value tongue.gif
Auditioning could be difficult given my room isn't built, my amps haven't been selected, some speakers are not available locally, etc...Should I choose speakers first and amps second?
I suppose I'll need to rely on people's opinions and reviews from others. Any suggestions on web sites that provide good unbiased head to head reviews?

Does the fact I already have buttkicker minis have an impact on the subs I should be looking at?
post #145 of 544

A few things on speakers:

 

  • Do it once, go all out, speakers are the biggest underbudgeted item in most theaters IMO.
  • Speakers first amps second, heck some high end options have the amps built-in.
  • First determine how much SPL you require.  Do you want/need true reference at the seated position?  If so your list just got real short.
  • I assume form factor is a non-issue for mains since your AT but how about the rest of the speakers?  Ideally you want them to match tonally what can you fit in your space?
  • How attractive must they be?  Finish options will be quite different between manufacturers.
  • Are your subs going to be sealed or ported?  Sealed subs integrate most easily with sealed mains.
  • Whats your required Frequency Range?  10-30K?  20-20K  20-15K?
  • Can you DIY?  You could have world class audio with your budget plus some sawdust.  Commercial offerings will cost 4X as much for same performance.
  • Consult the Speaker and Sub Demo thread on here to see if anyone local will demo their gear for you.
  • Stay out of Audio botiques or enter with hand-on-wallet.
  • Finally, which is your priority music or HT?.  The ultimate tools for either are not the same, and therefore a compromise must be struck.  Layout also becomes an issue for HTs and 2-channel playback as HTs are designed for multichannel playback and not 2-ch.  When you say music are you talking about multichannel music or 2-ch?  What type of music?  What levels? 

 

Thats all for this a.m. simple really.  tongue.gif

post #146 of 544
Thread Starter 
That's a great list of things to consider.
Some of the items in your list only raise more very basic questions in my head (it has been 20yrs after all) tongue.gif

Quote:
  • First determine how much SPL you require. Do you want/need true reference at the seated position? If so your list just got real short.
I have no clue what SPL i want/need. What is the definition of true reference levels?


Quote:
  • I assume form factor is a non-issue for mains since your AT but how about the rest of the speakers? Ideally you want them to match tonally what can you fit in your space?
  • How attractive must they be? Finish options will be quite different between manufacturers.
Correct, going AT so pretty flexible for LCR. Surrounds will be hidden in columns so can't be too deep. Should surrounds be dipoles?

Quote:
  • Are your subs going to be sealed or ported? Sealed subs integrate most easily with sealed mains.
Good to know. Should I pick sub(s) first or speakers? Does ported vs sealed equate to HT vs music decision?

Quote:
  • Whats your required Frequency Range? 10-30K? 20-20K 20-15K?
Not sure how to make that decision either:confused:
I have buttkickers so maybe that has some impact on requirements for sub's lower end capabilities?

Quote:
  • Can you DIY? You could have world class audio with your budget plus some sawdust. Commercial offerings will cost 4X as much for same performance.
WOW, that's a revelation. Are you referring to subs or all speakers? I'm surprised I haven't seen more people DIY if they can get 4X the performance - especially considering most threads I have been reading are not afraid of a little sawdust.

Quote:
  • Consult the Speaker and Sub Demo thread on here to see if anyone local will demo their gear for you.
  • Stay out of Audio botiques or enter with hand-on-wallet.
Check and check.

Quote:
  • Finally, which is your priority music or HT?. The ultimate tools for either are not the same, and therefore a compromise must be struck. Layout also becomes an issue for HTs and 2-channel playback as HTs are designed for multichannel playback and not 2-ch. When you say music are you talking about multichannel music or 2-ch? What type of music? What levels?
So if I said HT-51% and Music-49% then would that mean getting HT optimized speakers at the expense of music listening? Are there speakers that do both well but neither great? Still not sure what the sacrifices are when choosing one over the other. When listening to 2-ch rock source, should I allow the prepro to route audio to all speakers?
post #147 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksHitachi View Post

A few things on speakers:
  • Whats your required Frequency Range?  10-30K?  20-20K  20-15K?

This is an interesting point. Most people can't hear above 20K, even when their young. I can't hear much above 15K at 32. I wonder what the audio purists would say about buying speakers with a range that spans your actual hearing abilities?

Sub 20 Hz is understandable to some degree because you can feel it, but I just don't know about greater than 15K - 20K.

Not to take over the thread, but I'd be interested in the DIY LCR and surrounds you had in mind. It's probably easier to make the DIY decision if you know just how involved the build is.
post #148 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by 235 View Post

That's a great list of things to consider.
Some of the items in your list only raise more very basic questions in my head (it has been 20yrs after all) tongue.gif

Quote:
I have no clue what SPL i want/need. What is the definition of true reference levels?

Start here.  Reference at seated position (~105db) is significant.
Quote:
  • Should I use Dipoles?

 

IMO, No.  Properly setup surrounds should have no problem producing the surround field, IMO the dipoles are a "trick" for those either not willing or able to properly devote the space or resources to achieve it.

 

Quote:

Good to know. Should I pick sub(s) first or speakers? Does ported vs sealed equate to HT vs music decision?

 

Think of it as a system and not mains and subs seperate.  Look at both and see what will work together.  Ported has more options all the way around, but there are some issues with ported.  When matching ported designs together keep the port tunings as far apart as possible while keeping them as far as possible from the crossover freq.  This is the rub, and its a juggling act. 

 

I like sealed, b/c I like easy.  Sealed on Sealed = Easy.

 

Quote:

Not sure how to make that decision either:confused:
I have buttkickers so maybe that has some impact on requirements for sub's lower end capabilities?

 

Maybe, <1% of HT can do anything significant below 20, and 99.999% of commercial theaters cannot.  Furthermore that last octave(between 20 and 10Hz) will prob double the cost of whatever sub option you choose, so you really need to experience it for yourself to see if its worth it to you.

 

Quote:

WOW, that's a revelation. Are you referring to subs or all speakers? I'm surprised I haven't seen more people DIY if they can get 4X the performance - especially considering most threads I have been reading are not afraid of a little sawdust.
 

 

Both, Actually there is a fanatical DIY crowd here, check in and see whats going on......
 

Quote:

So if I said HT-51% and Music-49% then would that mean getting HT optimized speakers at the expense of music listening? Are there speakers that do both well but neither great? Still not sure what the sacrifices are when choosing one over the other. When listening to 2-ch rock source, should I allow the prepro to route audio to all speakers?

 

I'm trying not to steer you toward any type or brand of speaker.  The requirements for both music and HT do overlap, so its fair that a hybrid setup will perform excellently for both.  Research some HT type speakers and some critical listening speakers.  Pay attention to their Frequency Responses and Sensitivities(SPL Capabilities).  Youll see the tradeoffs. 

 

The AVR processing I use depends on the source, but often I do use all channel stereo.  FWIW, I'm using what I would consider critical listening speakers in my HT, but I'm in the process of gathering parts for a high efficiency build(HT speakers).  That doesn't lend any credibility to the decision just don't want to come off as a fanboy for a particular type of speaker or setup.  

 

I apologize this post turned into a mess when I tried to delete some redundant wording, oh well........

 

 


Edited by NicksHitachi - 8/13/12 at 12:48pm
post #149 of 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksHitachi View Post

A few things on speakers:
  • Whats your required Frequency Range?  10-30K?  20-20K  20-15K?

This is an interesting point. Most people can't hear above 20K, even when their young. I can't hear much above 15K at 32. I wonder what the audio purists would say about buying speakers with a range that spans your actual hearing abilities?

Sub 20 Hz is understandable to some degree because you can feel it, but I just don't know about greater than 15K - 20K.

Not to take over the thread, but I'd be interested in the DIY LCR and surrounds you had in mind. It's probably easier to make the DIY decision if you know just how involved the build is.

 

Again, not trying to steer someone just some thoughts. 

 

Here are a few excellent DIY kit sources IMO:

 

Madisound

Curt Campbell

DIYSoundGroup

Pi Speakers

Parts Express

 

And there are many more...

post #150 of 544
Quote:
This is an interesting point. Most people can't hear above 20K, even when their young. I can't hear much above 15K at 32. I wonder what the audio purists would say about buying speakers with a range that spans your actual hearing abilities?

Sub 20 Hz is understandable to some degree because you can feel it, but I just don't know about greater than 15K - 20K.

That IS an interesting question. However, what I remember from my Acoustics class in college is that there exists Difference Tones. They are the "buzz" you hear from two perfectly in tune pitches at a loud enough volume that are at the frequency difference between the two tones being played. So I would reckon, you may not hear the actual tones being played above 15K, but you may hear the difference, which adds to entire tonal color of the music. This is the opposite of overtones, which is a pitch above the actual pitches being played. These effects are, IMHO, most often associated with (and by that I mean most often experienced with) large orchestral works.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home