[quadmasta]

I sketched up my proposed theater room.


To the experts:

Will this room make for a good 2-row theater with 3 per row?


Room dimensions are 232" x 117", the ceiling slant starts at 48" from the floor.

 

[sleeks]

It might work, however a row of three theater seats (reclining) will be roughly 7 feet wide, leaving a 3 foot aisle. Don't know if that will be enough in your room with the lower ceiling on the sides.


It really depends on your seating choice.

 

[quadmasta]

I guess it would've helped if I explained my drawing before. The open wall in the drawing is actually a solid wall with a door pretty much directly in the middle. I can't move it because it's what's connected to my upstairs hallway.


The seating would be where the little sketchup guy is and the screen would be on the opposite wall. I just looked at my Berkline seating pamphlet and sleeks is right, it'll be a tight fit. The 088s are the narrowest of the series that I have information on. I could do a row of 4 chairs with armrests on both sides for the back row which would be 112.5" and give a little under 4" of room on the side and a front row of 3 chairs with armrests on both sides are 85.5" wide which would give a little under 3' for an aisle. Since the walls on the side wouldn't be slanted, I think this would work well. I'll try to model the chairs and throw them in the room.

 

[quadmasta]

This is a quick toss-together of what I was thinking of doing with the room. Everything's within an inch of actual dimensions except for the height of the seat and the armrest on the chairs, I didn't have that info so I guessed.

 

[sleeks]

That looks pretty good. Your second row will not get the best sound being against a wall. Some of those more knowledgable than me can help you treat it.

 

[Tapiozona]

Could be that its just not quite to scale or the screen is actually larger than it shoudl be but seems that the screen is rather low. At that height you'll have viewing problems for the back row with the screen so low to the ground.

 

[quadmasta]

The screen's probably bigger than it should be. It's currently a 100" diagonal at a 4:3 ratio. What's a better number?

 

[sleeks]

You really are going with a 4:3 screen.?


Why not CIH 2.35 or 16:9? 4:3 is only recommended if you watch a lot of SD television IMHO. If this is for movies, video games, HD TV, Widescreen SD Movies, HD DVD, etc, go with 16:9 at a minimum. This will bring the bottom of the screen up.


You will want to check with the riser height calculator sticky that you will good to go from the back row and that you have room for your center channel speaker (preferably above the screen).

 

[quadmasta]

My current projector is 4:3 so I'm going to do a 4:3 screen. When I get a better projector, I'll just make a new screen. I'm also going to do an adjustable masking system to mask off the top and bottom of the screen during widescreen movies.


Thanks for the advice on the riser height calculator, I'll check it out.

 

[quadmasta]

The riser height calculator says 11.5" inches for my riser height. I bumped it up and added a step. I'll probably knock down the size of the screen a little too.

 

[sleeks]



Quote:
Originally Posted by quadmasta /forum/post/0


My current projector is 4:3 so I'm going to do a 4:3 screen. When I get a better projector, I'll just make a new screen. I'm also going to do an adjustable masking system to mask off the top and bottom of the screen during widescreen movies.


Thanks for the advice on the riser height calculator, I'll check it out.

Cool. Thats a good reason to go 4:3.


You might want to consider going with a 16:9 screen with side masking so you won't have to buy a new screen when you update the projector. I guess that depends on how soon you will be upgrading the projector.


Make sure to leave space above (preferred) or below the screen for the center channel speaker unless you plan on an AT screen.

 

[quadmasta]

It'll be at least a year before I get a better projector. I was planning on doing an AT screen but with the cost of that being so high, your idea makes more sense.


Here's a mockup with a 50*89 screen 102" diagonal. I could move it up but I wasn't sure if it should be centered top to bottom.

 

[BFauska]

As far as the price of AT screens go, you can get an SMX screen for less than the price of most comercially available non AT screens. It seems a shame to waste that space behind the screen by forcing your speakers to be in front.


Looks like it could be a cool project.


Later,

Brian

 

[quadmasta]

I was planning on putting my subwoofer and left and right channels behind the screen, wasn't sure until now about putting the center behind the screen.


What should I do about placement for the surround speakers? In-walls?

 

[quadmasta]

bump

 

[Tedd]

SandmanX AT 16:9 screen, and an anamorphic lense for the pj, to use the full 4:3 panel?


I would consider inwalls, or dipoles for surround speakers. With all the speakers up front hidden behind the screen, and the inwall surrounds, you'd have a nice clean look to the room.