AVS Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I want a 2.35:1 screen in my home theater and was looking to place my L/C/R in-wall speakers behind them. I noticed SMX has a screen which can be placed right in front of the speakers without building a false wall, which can be found at the following link: http://www.smxscreen.com/at-projecti...plication.html


Can I use any acoustically transparent screen and place them in front of my in-walls?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,051 Posts
they all work. Some work better than others. The Stewart screen works very well as well as the mesh type of screens. Their (mesh) biggest advantage is that they typically dont have any moire issues. Disadvantages is that the mesh screens dont have alot of variety in terms of gains while Stewart screens can accoustic treat any of their screens
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Hutnicki /forum/post/16978175


they all work. Some work better than others. The Stewart screen works very well as well as the mesh type of screens. Their (mesh) biggest advantage is that they typically dont have any moire issues. Disadvantages is that the mesh screens dont have alot of variety in terms of gains while Stewart screens can accoustic treat any of their screens

I would really like to go AT for the acoustic benefits and asthetic\\immersive benefits of having the speakers behind the picture.


But I am held back only by these niggling issues:


I really want top tier video performance (I will be 10 feet from screen), and I am worried about how much of a real world noticeable compromise an AT screen (best available) is in terms of

a) uniformity

b) ansi contrast

c) off axis viewing

d) sharpness

e) ability to keep it clean


.....as compared to a stewart ST130 non AT screen.


The bottom line is if the non AT ST130 would look better in a noticeable way to my eyes than the best AT screen out there.


I am not worried about brightness, so the advanatge of the 1.3 gain on the ST130 is not really in play.


I understand the standard answer is that it is a slight compromise in video to gain the audio benefits. But are those slight video compromises in measurement only, or really noticeable in real world viewing conditions?


Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,230 Posts
Gamelover,


In my experience, (which with regards to AT-materials mainly comes from screen samples) there are three possible drawbacks compared to a solid screen.


i) No gain. There are no higher gain AT-screens available unless you go perforated, but I wouldn't recommend that. The brightest I've seen is the Center Stage XD which looks about the same as 1.0 gain matte white material, the others were a tad less bright, maybe 0.9 or so. So the ST130 would be a bit brighter, but as you say this is no problem for you.


ii) Sharpness up close. If you go up close to the screen it's difficult to make out the pixels of the AT-material I tested except the EN4K, which looks like a solid screen. However, I have also been looking at 1 pixel wide lines and they still look sharp on all materials. Also, when you step back to normal viewing distance (say 3 m or so) you can't really see any loss of sharpness (well, I couldn't at least...).


iii) Texture. The EN4K didn't show any texture at any distance. The Center Stage XD showed some lines that I could just make out in bright uniform material like ice and clouds etc. This was not caused by the holes, but by the weave being a bit uneven. I have also tried material from Prismasonic and Euroscreen, both identical materials which I in turn believe are identical to Sheerweave 4500 and the old Center Stage Material. This material had bigger holes and a tad lower gain, but since the weave is completely uniform you can't see any texture or holes if you stand back 2 meters or so.

Uniformity should be a non-issue as the screens have low gain.

Off axis viewing have been excellent on all AT-material I've tested. Again, with lower gain you don't get problems with this kind of stuff. On the contrary, the AT screen will perform better than the ST130 in uniformity/off-axis-viewing as the ST130 actually has a bit of gain and will drop of in brightness to the sides. (However this is hardly notacible unless you compare samples next to each other so you can see the relative brightness change as you move around.)

ANSI contrast. If you use black backing or cover the walls and speakers in light absorbing material it should be a non-issue. I couldn't see any loss at least.


I haven't had any issue with moiré either, though some materials require tilting to remove it.

Cleaning. Most AT-screens are made of nylon type of threads and should be easy enough to clean. The exception is the EN4K which is made from textile fabric and looks to be a nightmare if you get real dirt on it (e.g. a child with fingers covered in chocolate touching it). I mean what could you do? Put it in the laundry machine? If you can keep people from touching it I think you should be ok though.


My recommendation is that you write to the manufacturers and ask them for screen samples. There's nothing like seeing with you own eyes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Do you guys know anything about Seymour AV screens? They have some acoustically transparent screens, but I haven't really read anything about them from posters. I'll try looking around but if anybody would like to share, please go right ahead.


I'm also concerned about how it will look because my seating distance is also 10'. I have heard many say it looks just as great, but would really like to hear some more thoughts, preferably about Seymour AV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,902 Posts
I have a 2.37:1 SMX screen and absolutely love it. I have no issues with it whatsoever and only see the weave from the primary seating position with the 3 can lights above the screen on full (front row is at 11').


If I was to do it again right now I'd also look into SeymourAV's new fixed frame screens (less $$$). Seymour also has a new AT material which looks good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
I have had a 102" 2:35 Seymour XD retractable screen for a few weeks now and am thrilled with it. I sit about 11 feet back and the picture is immersive, while the sound comes from the spots it should.


I can't speak from a position of absolute authority since this is my first projector setup, but I looked at several home theater stores with rooms much darker than mine using non-AT screens, and I was shocked that the image on my XD looks better to my eyes. I'm a happy camper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler /forum/post/16979819


Gamelover,


In my experience, (which with regards to AT-materials mainly comes from screen samples) there are three possible drawbacks compared to a solid screen.


i) No gain. There are no higher gain AT-screens available unless you go perforated, but I wouldn't recommend that. The brightest I've seen is the Center Stage XD which looks about the same as 1.0 gain matte white material, the others were a tad less bright, maybe 0.9 or so. So the ST130 would be a bit brighter, but as you say this is no problem for you.


ii) Sharpness up close. If you go up close to the screen it's difficult to make out the pixels of the AT-material I tested except the EN4K, which looks like a solid screen. However, I have also been looking at 1 pixel wide lines and they still look sharp on all materials. Also, when you step back to normal viewing distance (say 3 m or so) you can't really see any loss of sharpness (well, I couldn't at least...).


iii) Texture. The EN4K didn't show any texture at any distance. The Center Stage XD showed some lines that I could just make out in bright uniform material like ice and clouds etc. This was not caused by the holes, but by the weave being a bit uneven. I have also tried material from Prismasonic and Euroscreen, both identical materials which I in turn believe are identical to Sheerweave 4500 and the old Center Stage Material. This material had bigger holes and a tad lower gain, but since the weave is completely uniform you can't see any texture or holes if you stand back 2 meters or so.

Uniformity should be a non-issue as the screens have low gain.

Off axis viewing have been excellent on all AT-material I've tested. Again, with lower gain you don't get problems with this kind of stuff. On the contrary, the AT screen will perform better than the ST130 in uniformity/off-axis-viewing as the ST130 actually has a bit of gain and will drop of in brightness to the sides. (However this is hardly notacible unless you compare samples next to each other so you can see the relative brightness change as you move around.)

ANSI contrast. If you use black backing or cover the walls and speakers in light absorbing material it should be a non-issue. I couldn't see any loss at least.


I haven't had any issue with moiré either, though some materials require tilting to remove it.

Cleaning. Most AT-screens are made of nylon type of threads and should be easy enough to clean. The exception is the EN4K which is made from textile fabric and looks to be a nightmare if you get real dirt on it (e.g. a child with fingers covered in chocolate touching it). I mean what could you do? Put it in the laundry machine? If you can keep people from touching it I think you should be ok though.


My recommendation is that you write to the manufacturers and ask them for screen samples. There's nothing like seeing with you own eyes.

Great info. Thanks
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top