I'm looking for a theatre display again.....

[Gray_Area]

I have room to get one now, so am looking to buy. I was leaning toward 50" plasma. Anybody have any makes and models in particular to comment on?

Does anyone have an alternative hardware suggestion? And, why?

[saint]

HD projector! Double the size of your screen Note some dissent in this thread:

For something close like that I'd go with a monitor. However, I disagree with PBJ's assessment of a projector in general. The 100" screen is the centerpoint of entertaining in our house frequently. 4 player Gauntlet, NFS Porsche Unleashed Racing, X-box and Wii gaming, freaking awesome with our HD projector. A 55" tv just wouldn't be the same at all.

Photos of course do not do the image quality justice. When we had a standard def projector it was good, but when we put up the HD projector it's a mind blowing picture. First thing we did was fire up the Planet Earth blu-ray and our jaws dropped.

[saint]

Why does the dissent always have to be me?

 

Not sure, check your mirror

I just wanted to make sure he knew that not everyone shared my opinion on projectors so he could make a good decision for his needs.

[drventure]

+1 on the projector.

We have a motorized, tab tensioned screen that I mounted into the ceiling. Hides away when you don't want a great big tv dominating the room, but rolls out quickly.

The important things about projectors, to me anyway, are:
1) the general ambient light level where you plan on putting it, even bright Projectors tend to need a darker room.
2) how easy is it to run cabling. Remember that probably all your stereo equipment will be near the screen, but the projector will be on the other side of the room.
3) the screen door effect. With many projectors, you can easily make out a grid of lines between pixels. That just annoys the heck out of me. But there are some that don't.
4) the required throw in the room. This is pretty important, esp if you have a peculiar sized room or a very large screen. Projectors have a "throw range" which just means that, at a particular distance from the screen, the projector can only make the image from x to y in size. So, if where you have to mount the projector would preclude getting the screensize you want, you either would have to move things or get a different projector.

I found

http://www.projectorcentral.com

to be an invaluable resource when researching projectors a while back.

[Necroticart]

Also have to give a +1

Right now i'm running an HD33 it was relatively inexpensive and preforms great. The black lvls could always be better but for the the price it was hard to pass up. Plus bulbs only run around $230- $250. also keep in mind if you don't plan to mount the projector then lens shift is something you might want to look into and another thing D-ILA vs DLP vs 3LCD each type has it's pros and cons I've always gone DLP given the sharper image and the fact they have no convergence issues since they use a single chip design which also benefits 3D viewing no crosstalk caused by misalignment.   

[ChadTower]

5)  The fact that nobody can walk between the projector and the screen while it's in use.

This is a big one I have seen a lot of people disregard until they put a theater in a small room and then nobody could leave once the movie begins.

[Gray_Area]

I thought of these two conditions later last night:

- my viewing distance is eight or nine feet

- under $1000

[saint]

I thought of these two conditions later last night:

- my viewing distance is eight or nine feet

- under $1000

They make short-throw projectors but it may cost a bit more. Jim scoffs, and there's not one size fits all, but the 100" screen in my basement is the entertainment center of our house now. Video games, family slide shows, and HD movies are stunning on the screen. Combined with the 5.1 audio system I installed as well, it really is the theater experience at home. My wife even bought us one of those movie theater-style popcorn poppers, and now my kids don't want microwave popcorn anymore. About once a week or so we all gather around, pop a couple of big bowls of real popcorn, and fire up either a new blu-ray HD movie, or indoctrinate our kids in one of our favorites from the 80's/90's. 50" televisions look small to me these days, which is boggling seeing as how I used to have a 32" tv...

Suggestion: Find someone with a 100" projector screen and watch a movie or at least a brief demo there. Then find a similar rig with a 50" inch TV. I'd about put money down that you'll prefer the projector.

In fact, a year ago we upgraded from a 480i projector to a HD 1080p projector. I'm about to re-mount the 480i projector in the the guest room in the basement, so I can hook up the wii for the kids (and occasionally me) because the HD projector is constantly occupied with X-box 360 or movies. The wii's on a TV right now, but the kids have been bugging me to put it on a projector again.

[saint]

I thought of these two conditions later last night:

- my viewing distance is eight or nine feet

- under $1000

Ah, price considerations: When I bought into it, getting a good HD projector put me back $1100 (but I got a spare bulb with it, which will save me $350 or whatever ridiculous amount a bulb costs down the road). We then built our own screen (read that as, my buddy built it for me as a gift) which works great and cost about $100 in materials. Our picture is amazing on the screen, but would probably jump up a notch in "wow" factor with a professional screen. Our thought was we would buy a professional screen when we could afford it, but we've never actually felt the need because the home built screen quality is so good.

SO - I think you could get into it for about $1200 for a good (but admittedly entry-level) HD 1080p projector, but under $1000 may be difficult. Also, down the road you'll have the replacement bulb to pay for which isn't an issue with a tv I don't think. Still our experience has been that the size and quality of the picture was well worth the extra cost.

[saint]

Problem with projectors is that you've got to dedicate a flat wall and a lot of unobstructed floor space to use them.  If you live in basement-land, maybe you've got that much dead space.  Maybe you're too crazy to realize it shouldn't be full of pinball machines.   They take forever to warm up and the whole time you're worrying about your bulb.  I've never met a projector owner that doesn't tell me exactly how many hours they have left on their bulb and how much a replacement costs.

Takes about 10 seconds for my projector to warm up. Not sure how dedicating a flat wall for a screen is any different than dedicating the space on the wall for the TV. Bigger, sure, but bigger's the point. Floor space I don't get at all. We do whatever we want with the floor, including having kids lay down to watch the movies if they want. Same as the TV.

No disagreement really on the bulb

[lilshawn]

bulbs are cheap enough now that it's not really that big of an issue. (most high end bulbs can be had for about 120)

stick to Philips (or other original brand) and steer clear of osram bulbs and you'll do fine. unless you want inexpensive vs. lifetime (approx 2500 hours vs. 4000+). Osram replacement bulbs can be obtained for about $60 and under on thebay.

[drventure]

5)  The fact that nobody can walk between the projector and the screen while it's in use.
This is a big one I have seen a lot of people disregard until they put a theater in a small room and then nobody could leave once the movie begins.

We just use the pause button.

[Gray_Area]

I got it that jim meant you might want pictures or something on the wall....

Of course, in the 80s, everyone in sci-fi had a wall screen, and everyone wanted one.

I have a dedicated theatre room. Almost strictly, I will be the only one watching. I might go 50" plasma, though, because like jim said it's place and play.

[lilshawn]

5)  The fact that nobody can walk between the projector and the screen while it's in use.
This is a big one I have seen a lot of people disregard until they put a theater in a small room and then nobody could leave once the movie begins.

We just use the pause button.

are we not mounting the projector on the ceiling?!?

[crashwg]

I'll throw in my 2¢ and say some people are prone no nausea induced by DLP's "rainbow effect."  My wife is one of those people so our next projector will have to not be DLP.

[shmokes]

I would unhesitatingly go with Plasma over LCD. The colors (especially black) are just better. And some LCDs (my friends nice Sony, but strangely not my far less expensive Philips) have a strange, flat look that makes things look somehow low quality and unrealistic. Not like the resolution is low, but like the source is poor quality like daytime soaps or something. It's very difficult for me to articulate, but I've seen it lots of times.

My problem with projectors (take with a giant grain of salt seeing as I've never owned one), is that it seems like it would be difficult to integrate them smoothly into the entertainment center for me. I LOVE my Harmony remote, and the idea that I can't press a single activity button (e.g., Watch Movie) and have it turn everything on and select all the proper inputs, etc., is a deal breaker. Now, I know that I could get some very long IR blasters or something to get my remote's signal back behind me to the projector, but I'm not at that point of home theater setup yet. I don't own a house, for one. So for me, I think a nice big TV is the better choice.

[kahlid74]

My problem with projectors (take with a giant grain of salt seeing as I've never owned one), is that it seems like it would be difficult to integrate them smoothly into the entertainment center for me. I LOVE my Harmony remote, and the idea that I can't press a single activity button (e.g., Watch Movie) and have it turn everything on and select all the proper inputs, etc., is a deal breaker. Now, I know that I could get some very long IR blasters or something to get my remote's signal back behind me to the projector, but I'm not at that point of home theater setup yet. I don't own a house, for one. So for me, I think a nice big TV is the better choice.

This makes sense except that now days everything is Receiver controlled.  A good receiver takes care of all of this including all of these things running, outputs, inputs, etc.  If you get a chance, check out the 300-700 range for receivers.  They can basically do everything you want with any type of output.

I'm a big fan of projects.  They are fantastic now for home entertainment rooms.

[ChadTower]

The ironic part of that is that the receiver is generally the thing that'll last 20 years.  Of all of the parts to replace in a home theater the receiver is usually the one rock solid part that doesn't need swapping.  I have a GE receiver from the mid 60s that can still blow the windows out.  Yeah, no processed modes, but who cares when you can feel the bass in your colon?

[Necroticart]

I'll throw in my 2¢ and say some people are prone no nausea induced by DLP's "rainbow effect."  My wife is one of those people so our next projector will have to not be DLP.

My wife has the same problem try an ND2 or 4 camera filter over the lens it will block most of the effect.

[CCM]

5)  The fact that nobody can walk between the projector and the screen while it's in use.

This is a big one I have seen a lot of people disregard until they put a theater in a small room and then nobody could leave once the movie begins.

Huh?   So hang a flat screen on the wall in that same small room, and your view will still be blocked when people walk in front of you...

[ChadTower]

Huh?   So hang a flat screen on the wall in that same small room, and your view will still be blocked when people walk in front of you...

Think about this for a second.  With a projector they often can't walk behind you either.

[Gray_Area]

I'll throw in my 2¢ and say some people are prone no nausea induced by DLP's "rainbow effect."  My wife is one of those people so our next projector will have to not be DLP.

By single-chip DLPs. I wonder whether the greater apparance of this effect to some is due to the pattern of a person's eye movements.


A little in contrast to the nature of this forum and all, but I don't want to put stuff together. The bulk of the work in this....project....may be as much as wall-mounting the display, but will probably be hooking it up to a computer and running an ethernet cable through the wall.

So what 50" plasmas do you recommend?

[shmokes]

Panasonic is best (RIP Pioneer).

[saint]

Huh?   So hang a flat screen on the wall in that same small room, and your view will still be blocked when people walk in front of you...

Think about this for a second.  With a projector they often can't walk behind you either.

Have to be a pretty funky room setup for that. Ceiling mounted projector properly spaced really doesn't have that issue any more than a tv on the wall. If you can't mount it properly, for instance if you're putting it on a table, then yeah, different story.

[lilshawn]

the gamut on some plasmas are terrible.

(http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=116768.msg1238418#msg1238418)

remember?

[shponglefan]

+1 for the projector idea.

I went with a projector for my HT a number of years ago and haven't looked back.  IMHO, the screen size you can get with a projector really puts the "theater" in home theater.  And on a cost basis, projectors tend to be cheaper given the screen size you can get.

That said, they need a dedicated "dark" room to function properly and require space for installing both the screen and the projector.

[shponglefan]

My problem with projectors (take with a giant grain of salt seeing as I've never owned one), is that it seems like it would be difficult to integrate them smoothly into the entertainment center for me. I LOVE my Harmony remote, and the idea that I can't press a single activity button (e.g., Watch Movie) and have it turn everything on and select all the proper inputs, etc., is a deal breaker. Now, I know that I could get some very long IR blasters or something to get my remote's signal back behind me to the projector, but I'm not at that point of home theater setup yet. I don't own a house, for one. So for me, I think a nice big TV is the better choice.

SRSLY?  Two button presses instead of one is a deal breaker vs having a 100+ inch theater screen?   

[lilshawn]

'mercans 

[shmokes]

My problem with projectors (take with a giant grain of salt seeing as I've never owned one), is that it seems like it would be difficult to integrate them smoothly into the entertainment center for me. I LOVE my Harmony remote, and the idea that I can't press a single activity button (e.g., Watch Movie) and have it turn everything on and select all the proper inputs, etc., is a deal breaker. Now, I know that I could get some very long IR blasters or something to get my remote's signal back behind me to the projector, but I'm not at that point of home theater setup yet. I don't own a house, for one. So for me, I think a nice big TV is the better choice.

SRSLY?  Two button presses instead of one is a deal breaker vs having a 100+ inch theater screen?  

It's not just an extra button press. It's an extra button press on an extra remote. And it's probably a super unintuitive remote because they almost all are. Moreover, you don't just have to turn on the power. You also need to select inputs and other things as well. Anyway, you'll notice that I didn't say I would never buy a projector. I said that for me, right now, living in an apartment rather than a house, a big TV makes more sense. When I have a house and can make the effort to control everything with a Harmony using IR blasters or RF, I think it very likely that I'll seriously consider a projector.

Edit: grammar

[shponglefan]

It's not just an extra button press. It's an extra button press on an extra remote. And it's probably a super unintuitive remote because they almost all are. Moreover, you don't just have to turn on the power. You also need to select inputs and other things as well. Anyway, you'll notice that I didn't say I would never buy a projector. I said that for me, right now, living in an apartment rather than a house, a big TV makes more sense. When I have a house and can make the effort to control everything with a Harmony using IR blasters or RF, I think it very likely that I'll seriously consider a projector.

To each there own, but I was a little surprised that having an extra remote is a big issue.  FWIW, in my experience all I ever do with my projector is turn it on or off, and the remote is perfectly easy to use for that (actually, it's probably the simplest remote I have).  Input selection is handled on my receiver, which in turn is connected to the projector.

At any rate, there are upsides and downsides of projectors vs LCD TVs... Like you say, in an apartment, a projector probably isn't as viable an option.

[ed12]

hi
if u are gonna drop coin on a plasma <<yuck yuck read yuck
why not a 50" led wall mount ? and or a 60"
sharp makes some real nice unit's
pricey i agree,but boy oh boy
i am talking the wiffie into a 60" right now

ed

[Vigo]

After working out the problems with Panasonic on the Plasma I bought, I have been super happy with the quality and price of my 50" plasma that I just bought.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00752VKD2/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i00

I'ts a 720, but I actually prefer 720 to 1080 anyway. 1080 may be pretty, but I watch a lot of old film and tv. I notice way too much film defect on a 1080 and it worsens my enjoyment experience.

I wouldn't touch a projector because I like being able to watch with the lights on. I don't like LCD's as much either, at least ones that come in a reasonable price range. You will have to pay a ton of money to have a picture that competes with a plasma as far as black levels and color richness goes.

[Gray_Area]

It's not just an extra button press. It's an extra button press on an extra remote.

I'm with shmokes - I hate having to fiddle with stuff. However. I watch only Netflix and stored data, in which case a mouse and keyboard are best for me. Plus you can surf best with them at the drop of a hat, as I'm wont to do at times - stop a movie and look up actors and such.

Thinking more about the space, I tend to have a dim 'backlight' on in the room, otherwise I can get a headache. I notice theatres these days have dim ambient lighting, and I haven't gotten a headache in one in a while.


@Vigo: I wonder about Panasonic after looking up the TC-P50U2 VIERA wherein, at ConsumerReportsonline, there are several people saying there's a fault that Panasonic won't address. What were your problems?

[Vigo]

Two problems. First was that the tv has composite video-in was using the same inputs as the standard component-in. The tv was not registering that I had a full HD composite plugged in and the image was black and white because it was not looking for the luma and chroma. I updated the TV firmware (super easy because it was a internet capable tv). and then after update I had an option to switch between Component in and composite in.

The second problem was that I was disappointed with the quality of the 3d. The 2d to 3d conversion is spectacular, but the native 3d video seems to have some nasty crosstalk in scenes where the picture was dark but had some bright spots. (i.e. night sky and moon) It wasn't a sync issue though. I researched, and even though I have panasonic glasses, they simply do not get dark enough to block out the bright scenes since the tv is very vibrant. I adjusted the video as much as I could, and it is more acceptable now. I tried holding up some darkening filters to the lenses, and the 3d becomes almost perfect. I may be modding my 3d glasses in the future since it is a hassle to darken the screen every time i want 3d.

and as far as brand goes, I would trust Panasonic much more than most brands. I am currently part of a class action lawsuit on my old samsung. Sammy just denied my claim that was previously approved. They are telling me that even though I did proved I had a defective TV, and even though I filed correctly, they changed their standards for what kind of approval they are accepting, after the fact. So now I am denied, coincidentally they did this within hours of the court deadline. Asses.

[lilshawn]

I am currently part of a class action lawsuit on my old samsung.

is this the one that the power supply fails because of a bum cap? or is this a different one?

[Vigo]

I am currently part of a class action lawsuit on my old samsung.

is this the one that the power supply fails because of a bum cap? or is this a different one?

Yep, That's the one. Although I had a whole lot more go wrong on my tv. If it was only a bum cap that went wrong, I would have replaced it and went on my way. I had massive lines running through my screen both horizontally and vertically. Replaced 2 of the TV boards and it still had problems.

Man, I was all hot and bothered for a 3D HDTV and then life interfered.  Then I got a cheapie TriOviz setup going on my Xbox 360.  And, yeah, I basically hate having to wear glasses.   

Yeah, there is effort with glasses. I probably would not have gotten a 3D tv, except it was no more expensive than non 3d of Panasonic. I dont know much about the TriOviz method, but after seeing the cheap solution you found, it seems like a smart route to feed the need for 3D.

[DillonFoulds]

I'm on my third samsung FPD. The first two were plasmas, and they both got horizontal black lines. Sets both lasted about 14 months and then like clockwork the lines appeared. I managed to talk the customer service department into swapping out the sets both times. My third one is LED, so I guess we'll see how long this one lasts...

[Gray_Area]

Electronics are inexpensive, but they're getting cheap.

[ChadTower]

Broadening the scope a little bit I am in the process of cutting the cord from DirecTV.  I'm going to online streaming and local storage.  So far, it's going well, with some small device specific challenges along the way.

It's amazing how sometimes the best results come from the noname brands.  I have a 60" WEGA RPTV in my basement that barely ever plays well with anything.  HDMI is buggy and the projector is defective despite being a very high end TV when it was purchased (not by me but I appreciate how much it sucks to spend $3000 on a TV and give it away 2.5 years later due to defects).  Getting that WEGA to play nice with a WDTV client has been a challenge to say the least.

I have two old 32" LCDs from Olevia that were value models years ago.  I plugged the WDTV client into those and BOOM instant compatibility with no issues at all.  In fact they are showing a clearer HD picture than I've ever seen them show.  The $3000 WEGA has all sorts of issues but the cheapo noname LCDs are still kicking and work wonderfully with a modern client.

You really never know what you're going to get with modern TVs and that just kills my motivation to spend substantial money on them.  Last night I was at the Sony Outlet by my house talking to a salesman.  I told him about my WEGA and he was instantly familiar with the issues.  Of course he told me it's time to replace that with a similar sized TV.  I asked him why I should spend $3000 on another Sony given that the one I have lasted the original owner less than three years.  He pointed out that a 60" Plasma at his store is $1800.  Same question, $1800, and get his response:  "Buying a modern TV is always a gamble.  Sometimes they just don't last the way one would expect.  We know this when we buy one."  I thanked him for his time and honesty and for talking me out of buying a new TV.

I just don't understand the TV consumer's mindset now.  We went from TVs that would still be perfectly functional 20 years after purchase that would only be replaced for size upgrades to TVs that cost three times as much and maybe last 25% of the lifespan.  People are willing to accept this?  It makes no sense to me at all.

[shmokes]

To some degree, this seems like an unfair complaint. Like expressing displeasure with a VCR's longevity shortly after the introduction of DVD. If you buy any descent-quality TV today there's no reason to think it won't last you many years. My Philips LCD panel is four or five years old (I bought it with one of the Bush tax rebates, whenever that was) and it's more-or-less indistinguishable in terms of quality and features from anything you can buy in the store today. I mean, it doesn't have 3D, or 120hz refresh, so I'm not saying that technology isn't constantly improving as it always will. But it's got a perfectly nice 1080p picture and lots of inputs including like 4 perfectly good HDMI ports. There's no reason to think this TV won't do everything I want it to do for the next 5 years. Content's not going to shift to 4k any time soon.

Part of my point is,  I doubt an Olevia rear projection television made at the same time as your Sony would be any better. Don't get me wrong. I've definitely been happier with no-name or smaller-name devices plenty of times in my life. But the reality is that the Wega TV was purchased at an unusually transformative time in the TV industry (shift to flat panels, shift to HDTV, HDMI vs. DVI). That time is over and has been for some time. The TV market is not fraught with unknowns right now. Any HD LCD or Plasma from Vizio, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, LG, or pretty much any other manufacturer is going to serve you fine for many years going forward. And prices are pretty fantastic right now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I sort of suspect that we don't spend more on a TV today any more than we spend more on a candy bar or a soda today or a house than we did 20 years ago. We also get paid more.

Don't get me wrong . . . some panels have far better pictures than others, with better color saturation, contrast, black levels, refresh-rate, bonus features like Netflix streaming, etc. Some are better values than others. You should do your homework and get the best bang for your buck. But this is no different than it's ever been.

[ChadTower]

I'm not talking about technology advances or image quality.  I'm talking about basic hardware and firmware quality.  A high end TV should have HDMI firmware without bugs, period.  To have contol sync issues in the main interface for a high end TV is inexcusable.  That WEGA's HDMI firmware is awful.  Then we get to the basic manufacturing quality of the projector itself, which lasted about 2.5 years, and one of the three LCD lenses warped in about 3 years.  That's just inexcusable for what is supposed to be a very high end product.

And you can say "RPTV was a flawed concept to begin with" but nobody knew that at the time.  How many reports are there of LCDs having to be replaced within 2-3 years?  Plasmas too?  The build quality is just garbage these days compared to 20 years ago across all of the modern TV types.  There is every reason to believe these TVs won't last many years because too high a percentage of them are already dead.  I wouldn't mind that if they were in the same price range as TVs 20 years ago but they aren't.  (The equivalent of) $1500 televisions barely even existed 20 years ago and now that seems to be the baseline consumer expectation.  I go to someone's house and the first thing they want to show me is their $2200 television.  Somehow the market has shifted to far higher cost and far less reliability and people are proud of that.  It boggles my mind.

[shmokes]

I wonder if the problem with the HDMI on that set isn't maybe the hardware, rather than the firmware. When that TV was purchased, I'll bet HDMI was not being used by much of anything. Perhaps that set has HDMI 1.0, or even a non-standard HDMI (sort of like Pre-N wireless routers). Shrug.

At any rate, I think you're pretty safe right now buying a television. Contrary to what your salesperson said, it's not really much of a gamble. LCD and Plasma are both totally solid (though I think the Plasma will have diminished brightness 10 years from now, unless that's no longer applicable). The only questionable tech at the moment is 3D, which isn't standardized across manufacturers and may not be supported with content in the long term. But the extra cost for 3D is pretty negligible. Also it's a pretty stupid feature. So you can easily take it or leave it.

[ChadTower]

Not being standardized across manufacturers is what you just said was possibly the issue with HDMI on the WEGA.  Why would I want to consider 3D while it's in a similar state of flux?

There are so many reports out there of TVs needing replacement within 18 months that I see no reason to believe it's totally solid.  There are basic financial principles at work here.  Increased cost + increased risk = decreased value. 

[shmokes]

Why would I want to consider 3D while it's in a similar state of flux?

Because of this:

. . . the extra cost for 3D is pretty negligible. Also it's a pretty stupid feature. So you can easily take it or leave it.

Granted, if 3D is something that is actually important to you (my gut tells me that it isn't), and you think that it's a feature that will see wide support instead of fading away as a fad, then maybe it's better to hold off a year or two to see what happens.

[ChadTower]

Granted, if 3D is something that is actually important to you (my gut tells me that it isn't), and you think that it's a feature that will see wide support instead of fading away as a fad, then maybe it's better to hold off a year or two to see what happens.

You're right, 3D doesn't matter to me.  I spent 20 minutes last night watching a $4500 3D display last night.  It's nice, I suppose, but if the $4500 TV didn't move me then the stuff they put into a normal consumer level TV sure won't.

[Vigo]

The 3d Panny TV I just bought was $700. The same brand non-3d tv of the same size/resolution was $650 and was not network ready. Getting the 3D one was a no brainer in my case. I wanted direct streaming, so I was willing to pay the extra $50 anyway.

[AtomSmasher]

It's not just an extra button press. It's an extra button press on an extra remote. And it's probably a super unintuitive remote because they almost all are. Moreover, you don't just have to turn on the power. You also need to select inputs and other things as well. Anyway, you'll notice that I didn't say I would never buy a projector. I said that for me, right now, living in an apartment rather than a house, a big TV makes more sense. When I have a house and can make the effort to control everything with a Harmony using IR blasters or RF, I think it very likely that I'll seriously consider a projector.

Just thought I'd mention that IR bounces off of the projector screen or wall, so in general you don't need an IR blaster.  My projector works great with my Harmony remote when I point the remote towards the front of the room, even though my projector is on the ceiling in the back of the room.

[ark_ader]

Buy yourself a cheap projector and a decent supply of bulbs (3) and it will be the best purchase for a home cinema.  I'd stay away from the IM2 C3X Lumis 3D-S and get yourself a Acer H5360BD as it does 3D and the price is pretty much a steal.  The replacement bulbs are really cheap too.  I just have an old Sanyo which I use on occasion that does the job with XGA resolution.

Great with the Topgun and Xbox House of the Dead.   

[shmokes]

The #1 reason by a country mile to own a projector is Ikaruga. At least the GameCube version has an option in settings for a vertical screen, which is pretty well useless with the typical TV screen, but with a projector it's a simple thing to get 7' vertical feet of Ikaruga on the wall. And it is amazing.

[ChadTower]

Buy yourself a cheap projector and a decent supply of bulbs (3) and it will be the best purchase for a home cinema.  I'd stay away from the IM2 C3X Lumis 3D-S and get yourself a Acer H5360BD as it does 3D and the price is pretty much a steal.  The replacement bulbs are really cheap too.  I just have an old Sanyo which I use on occasion that does the job with XGA resolution.

Great with the Topgun and Xbox House of the Dead.   

Worth considering, for sure, at $520 shipped.

[ChadTower]

...or maybe not...

Using BluRay 3D as an example... in addition to the display device you'd also have to upgrade your BluRay player to a 3D capable unit... upgrade your HDMI cable for a 1.4 capable cable... upgrade your AV receiver because even if it's fairly new it's not going to be HDMI 1.4 capable... and then a pair of active shutter glasses for each person in the house plus any regular guests like Grandma.  All for a small handful of channels on DirecTV and a small but increasing number of 3D movies on BluRay.

It may be possible to upgrade some BluRay players to 3D capable via firmware upgrades IF they have the juice for HDMI 1.4.  Yeah, I know the PS3 counts here, but I'm not interested in a $300 optical player.

All of that while the standards and tech are still evolving much like the aforementioned RPTVs and the early resolutions (720, then 1080, etc).


So, 3D is still not really all that worthwhile, at least to me.  But at $520 for the projector does position itself strongly as a 2D HD projector as well.

[shmokes]

FWIW, no need to upgrade your receiver to support HDMI 1.4. It'd be nice, of course . . . cleaner. But everything would work just as well without. HDMI directly from BluRay to projector, digital audio back to your current receiver. For that matter, it occurs to me that my complaint regarding IR blasters and Harmony remotes is probably also a much smaller issue than I suggested for the same reason. Power and inputs can often be controlled over HDMI, so you can just tell your projector to turn on and off automatically, and switch to the appropriate input, based on the signal coming over the HDMI cable. I can do this my TV which is quite a few years old now. So I assume that newer devices, using a newer HDMI spec, no less, generally have the same capability.

Edit: a good illustration of this concept, actually, is my setup. I have a very nice receiver, but unfortunately I purchased it JUST before HDMI switching became a feature on mainstream receivers. So my receiver has no HDMI ports. I lose absolutely nothing as a result of this, except for initial simplicity during setup. But my current setup works exactly the same as it would if my receiver had HDMI ports on it. My TV has four HDMI inputs, so all HDMI devices are plugged directly into the TV. A TOS/Link cable then runs from the Audio Out on my TV back to my receiver. Everything is perfectly seamless. My TV gets the proper HDMI video feed. My receiver gets the proper DTS or Dolby surround feed.

[ChadTower]

One thing I did spend money on is a nice Harmon Kardon AV receiver.  Lots of inputs, lots of power, etc.  Of course, it started to fail 24 months after I bought it, and today all of the digital inputs are dead as is all digital processing of analog inputs.  So now all the expensive AV receiver can do is straight two channel and even then only to the satellites.  

[drventure]

Of course, it started to fail 24 months after I bought it, and today all of the digital inputs are dead as is all digital processing of analog inputs.  So now all the expensive AV receiver can do is straight two channel and even then only to the satellites.   

Wow. that's surprising in an HK. I'd always thought they had a pretty strong rep.

I ended up with the high end Onkyo about a year and a half ago. Really like it so far, so I guess we'll see what kind of longevity it has.

Do you have your audio/video gear on any power conditioners/surge protectors?

[shmokes]

At least it looks nice on your component shelf. Harmon Kardon makes a beautiful chassis.  

[ChadTower]

Wow. that's surprising in an HK. I'd always thought they had a pretty strong rep.

I ended up with the high end Onkyo about a year and a half ago. Really like it so far, so I guess we'll see what kind of longevity it has.

Do you have your audio/video gear on any power conditioners/surge protectors?

Just some low end surge protectors.  I wouldn't expect them to do much.  I'm not sure how a surge would get through the power supply, through the main board, through the "daughterboard connector to the digital board", to the digital processing board.  I think an AC surge would have blown something in the power supply or the main board.  This isn't the first time I've had something blow a "digital processing board".  Back in the day I had two Panasonic set top DVD recorders blow their encoder boards, and of course, when brought in for repair the model had been discontinued (replacement parts unavailable) even though they were under a year old.

I have really, really, really bad luck with home theater stuff.  It doesn't matter if I buy cheap or expensive.  It fails fast.  The only things I have bought in the last ten years that hasn't been quick failures is the two cheapo Olevia LCDs I have.

[shmokes]

Who are you, and what did you do with this guy?

The ironic part of that is that the receiver is generally the thing that'll last 20 years.  Of all of the parts to replace in a home theater the receiver is usually the one rock solid part that doesn't need swapping.  I have a GE receiver from the mid 60s that can still blow the windows out.  Yeah, no processed modes, but who cares when you can feel the bass in your colon?

[ChadTower]

Who are you, and what did you do with this guy?

The ironic part of that is that the receiver is generally the thing that'll last 20 years.  Of all of the parts to replace in a home theater the receiver is usually the one rock solid part that doesn't need swapping.  I have a GE receiver from the mid 60s that can still blow the windows out.  Yeah, no processed modes, but who cares when you can feel the bass in your colon?

Generally.  Sadly, not for me.  That's the stereo in my son's room.  I used it for like 15 years until I "upgraded" to an entry level Sony AV receiver.  I "upgraded" that maybe 5 years ago to the HK that is now marginally functional.  Trust me, if there were a way to do 5.1 on that GE, I would do it in a heartbeat.  It sounds better and has more power than either of the other two.

[shponglefan]

Wow. that's surprising in an HK. I'd always thought they had a pretty strong rep.

I ended up with the high end Onkyo about a year and a half ago.  Really like it so far, so I guess we'll see what kind of longevity it has.

HK used to have a good rep, but it's gone downhill in the last decade or so (their QC has apparently gone to poop).  Onkyo, Denon or Yamaha are the front-runners for HT receivers these days.

[ChadTower]

That seems about right from my experience.  My HK has been one issue after another.  I'm not even sure I want to bother trying to get it fixed at this point but I'm too cheap and too burned to invest again.

When I was talking earlier it was based on my experiences with older receivers.  They usually work well no matter how old they are.  How many older people do you know with a receiver they bought in the 70s that still works well?  I seriously doubt anything made now will still be working in 20 years.  That just doesn't happen anymore.

[Dawgz Rule]

Love my HK reciever and speakers.  My wife, however, does not.  Sad to hear that they have slipped in quality. 

[Gray_Area]

I love the idea of not having to use a PC to interface, but most of my content is self-storage based

I'm looking at a plasma that doesn't have a PC input. What's the issue with DVI to HDMI?

[ark_ader]

The PS3 BR player is 3D compatible. 

[shmokes]

I love the idea of not having to use a PC to interface, but most of my content is self-storage based

I'm looking at a plasma that doesn't have a PC input. What's the issue with DVI to HDMI?

DVI to HDMI doesn't pass audio, which can be a non-issue in many many situations. But HDMI is a standard port on PCs now, and has been for some time. If you don't have it, it can be had on very inexpensive, low-end graphics cards.

[ChadTower]

The PS3 BR player is 3D compatible. 

To me the PS3 is just a way overpriced BR player with a lot of features I don't want. 

[shmokes]

It's also a videogame console.

[Vigo]

Video games? Pshaw! That's one of those unwanted features.

[ChadTower]

It's also a videogame console.

That's included in the list of features I don't want enough to pay extra.  I haven't turned on a game console for more than ten minutes in 2012.

[Gray_Area]

I love the idea of not having to use a PC to interface, but most of my content is self-storage based

I'm looking at a plasma that doesn't have a PC input. What's the issue with DVI to HDMI?

DVI to HDMI doesn't pass audio, which can be a non-issue in many many situations. But HDMI is a standard port on PCs now, and has been for some time. If you don't have it, it can be had on very inexpensive, low-end graphics cards.

I was looking at that. The PC is a 'desktop', meaning low form factor. I saw cards on ebay that were DVI, as well as having an HDMI port. I was sort of looking for PNP when I got the display home (I'm going to look at it tomorrow night). VGA>VGA to DVI adapter>DVI to HDMI cable>TV wouldn't work?

[testicle187]

http://www.epson.com/alf_upload/pdfs/projectors/brochure_475wi-480i-485wi.pdf?BV_UseBVCookie=yes

I put the Epson 485wi projectors in classrooms at work quite often recently.  They may only be 1280x800 but they are very bright and have amazing picture.  Instant on/off with no warm up or cool down.  We actually install them to a light switch.  They make a 100ish inch screen from about 12" inches back (and can go larger within reason).  These are interactive Smartboards as well that two people can draw. 

I think they cost us around $2000 each, but they would make a nice home theater projector and eliminate most complaints people have about projectors.  Plus Epson bulbs are cheap and get a lot of hours on the bulb.   

[Ond]

At the moment I'm spending almost all my spare time upgrading our home theatre (thus my lack of progress on anything else).  While you guys are busy debating the ins and outs of HDMI versions etc the sawdust is flying around me  . I probably won't add much to the debate but here are some thoughts anyway.   I've been looking at home theatre stuff for well, many years, in fact long before there ever was such a thing except in the home of the super rich.  Back in the 80's I worked in television studio production and had access to the best video projectors the industry could produce in the day.  They were primarily large and very heavy CRT projection units that cost as much as a family home.  Sometimes we set these up for stadium events, rock concerts or the like. That's where my interest kicked off.  I had to wait years and years until the home user market finally had access to 'affordable' projectors.  There was still no sign of digital audio amps, DVDs etc. 

For a one of my birthdays (I forget which  ) I hired a big ass Sony CRT unit (which retailed at around AU$60K) for the weekend), a laser disc player and a stack of movies for a few mates and the family.  The picture on the 8 foot screen was pretty damn good.  Affordable projectors to buy with that kind of quality were still way off in the future.  Every now and then I'd wander into a specialist outlet and say to the guy "so, show me your best projector, show me what you've got" and walk away soon after muttering "nup, still no good".

Fast forward to the last 8 years or so and all that changed, units like the Panasonic AE series finally brought quality home theatre images to the home for around AU$2-3K.
That same price can get you stunning 1080P images on 100"+ screens now.  There's no real comparison with a large screen and matching sound system.  I say that as an owner of a 50" 3D Samsung TV.  When our family wants to really enjoy a film together we head for the big screen room.  We don't use it for video gaming or TV or anything else just something like the latest action flick at thundering decibels in a darkened room.
 
Some of the real changes I’ve seen  are more around the digital format, the switch from component video and discreet optical audio to HDMI.  Actually I do have something of value to add and that’s about, cables.  Don’t get ripped off with your cable purchases.  Cable sales and the ridiculous pricing that goes with that is one of the most lucrative money makers in the retail HT market.  When I first wired up my house during construction I was quoted around AU$1200 for a 10 metre Component Cable.  I bought the same cable of the reel at a wholesaler and fitted my own gold plated plugs for 1/10th of that price.  Same story with a 10 metre HDMI ver.1.4 cable I just bought.  Did my research and got it from a cable wholesaler at a fraction of the price the retail outlets fleece people for.  Super high performance digital cables are a lie, the only difference is in how robust the plug head is, that’s it.  Trust Ond.
If anyone’s interested I recommend Denon gear for amps blu ray players etc.  The units I bought 4 or so years ago are running strong and without any issues.

So I’m off to feed this 10 metre HDMI cable through the wall and back to sawing, screwing     

[drventure]

Actually I do have something of value to add and that’s about, cables.  Don’t get ripped off with your cable purchases.  Cable sales and the ridiculous pricing that goes with that is one of the most lucrative money makers in the retail HT market.

ahofle found a great deal on a 6foot hdmi cable a while back

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=109951.msg1164039#msg1164039

 

I picked up a 50' model for 15$ off ebay, it runs all the way around the room, from the av gear in front, to the projector on the wall behind. Picked up a 50' power cord too, so all my gear, including the projector can be plugged into a UPS/surge protector.

For .28% the price of that cable, I'd say the one I got works pretty dang good  

[Gray_Area]

digital cables are a lie, the only difference is in how robust the plug head is, that’s it.  Trust Ond.

So I’m off to feed this 10 metre HDMI cable through the wall and back to sawing, screwing    

I would get a screwing in between things, too.  Yeah, the cable thing seems to be universal - I see it on guitar forums, etc - the physics is simple, a well-made cable means good though simple construction methods and using good though inexpensive materials.

[saint]

If you're not buying your cables from monoprice.com, you're paying too much as a rule (though that ebay deal was a score).

[ChadTower]

If you're not buying your cables from monoprice.com, you're paying too much as a rule (though that ebay deal was a score).

When installing the WDTVs I had to buy a bunch of HDMI cables.  Monoprice was more than twice the price of Amazon once you factored in shipping.  Monoprice isn't all that great for small orders.  Shipping is often more than the total in your cart.

[nickbuol]

If you're not buying your cables from monoprice.com, you're paying too much as a rule (though that ebay deal was a score).

+1,000,000

EDIT: Long post deleted because I couldn't clearly communicate that a large projection setup can be awesome without having to spend a ton.  It came across just wrong.

[nickbuol]

Crap.  I sound like a pompous ass.  I didn't mean to.  

Pompous long post removed. Sorry.  PM me if you ever want to read it. LOL

[AtomSmasher]

If you're not buying your cables from monoprice.com, you're paying too much as a rule (though that ebay deal was a score).

When installing the WDTVs I had to buy a bunch of HDMI cables.  Monoprice was more than twice the price of Amazon once you factored in shipping.  Monoprice isn't all that great for small orders.  Shipping is often more than the total in your cart.

This is probably because I'm located about two hours away from their warehouse, but I've never had a shipping cost over $5 from them (usually it's around $3), even when I ordered 30 cables.

[saint]

Crap.  I sound like a pompous ass.  I didn't mean to. 

Yeah, mission accomplished.  You'll fit right in this thread, though.

Don't hate on him because he's right PBJ. Everyone has their own needs, no doubt, but all things being equal you can't beat the full blown 100+" home projector experience.

[ChadTower]

I put two HDMI cables at $3.50 each into my cart and the shipping was $7.  The same cables were $3.50 shipped on Amazon.  

Monoprice is awesome for a lot of things but you can beat it for small orders.

[nickbuol]

Crap.  I sound like a pompous ass.  I didn't mean to. 

Yeah, mission accomplished.  You'll fit right in this thread, though.

Don't hate on him because he's right PBJ. Everyone has their own needs, no doubt, but all things being equal you can't beat the full blown 100+" home projector experience.

I don't think that we will ever convince Jim.  Then again, if I fit in with him, I should probably go back and delete my post. 

[saint]

I put two HDMI cables at $3.50 each into my cart and the shipping was $7.  The same cables were $3.50 shipped on Amazon.  

Monoprice is awesome for a lot of things but you can beat it for small orders.

Yep, I was able to beat monoprice on a 6' hdmi cable including shipping at Amazon. Surprised me I'll check both from now on.

[ChadTower]

That brings up a fair point.  Is all that expense worth it for a man without kids?  A family spends $60 at the movies.  A single guy spends $10-12.  How many $11 movie tickets do you have to buy to pay for that home theater setup?  200?

[nickbuol]

There is definitely a break even point with Monoprice.  Then again, unless you have Amazon Prime, you still have to spend $25 at Amazon too in order to not have to pay shipping.  I have found that around that price, it doesn't matter where I go.  Ordering from Amazon with free "super saver" shipping will get my the stuff in at least a week.  Monoprice, usually 2 days unless I order the 1st thing of the day.  I also trust the quality of the Monoprice stuff.   To get a cable for $3.50 shipped on Amazon either will generally take longer, or be cheap quality from my experience.  Not saying it is all junk, there are many good nuggets out there.  

One big benefit to Amazon is that I buy stuff from them all the time due to their product variety, so I can tag on a cable or two and not have to pay shipping as long as I am willing to wait for it to actually ship and get to me.

[Gray_Area]

That brings up a fair point.  Is all that expense worth it for a man without kids?  A family spends $60 at the movies.  A single guy spends $10-12.  How many $11 movie tickets do you have to buy to pay for that home theater setup?  200?

If it's only current movies, perhaps.


What do you all think of this site, and price?? (Have to register an all that to see shipping I think.)


LG Infinia 55LW5600 55-Inch Cinema 3D 1080p 120 Hz LED-LCD HDTV

member price: $ 315 VIP price : $ 287  


http://www.hotabiz.com/us-productinfo.asp?id=7310

[nickbuol]

That brings up a fair point.  Is all that expense worth it for a man without kids?  A family spends $60 at the movies.  A single guy spends $10-12.  How many $11 movie tickets do you have to buy to pay for that home theater setup?  200?

Very true.  I used to have to argue that point with my wife.

Counter-point: How many movie theaters are the perfect temperature (my wife is always cold), has a cheap supply of fresh popcorn and drinks or lets you bring your own goodies (beer/wine/Skittles), starts the movie when YOU want to see it, has comfy seats, allows pets (or is that "pests"   ), will pause the show in case you need to go to the bathroom, allows you to text (pausing optional), can jump from movie to music party on the fly, doesn't smell funny, doesn't have sticky floors, if the people next to or behind you are too loud, you can tell them to be quiet/get out/or just turn up the volume, so on...

It is something that we've managed to justify.  Our lives are so hectic that it is great at the end of a day to recline back and "crash" while watching something to get our minds off of the crazy day.  Plus, I live in Iowa where it can be well over 100F (with humidity) in summer, and below 0F in the winter plus wind chill.  Spring and fall are very short seasons for us.

[nickbuol]

What do you all think of this site, and price?? (Have to register an all that to see shipping I think.)


LG Infinia 55LW5600 55-Inch Cinema 3D 1080p 120 Hz LED-LCD HDTV

member price: $ 315 VIP price : $ 287  


http://www.hotabiz.com/us-productinfo.asp?id=7310

A quick google search of hotabiz.com review doesn't make me want to give them any money.

Plus $315 (let alone $287) for a 55-inch tv is bogus.  That TV should be around the $1000-$1500 price range.

Either they are scamming to steal your money, or they are scamming to get you to pay $1000 shipping.  Either way, it is a scam or shady at best, and that isn't very promising.

[saint]

First thing I thought at those prices was to wonder where they were stolen from

[ChadTower]

Counter-point: How many movie theaters are the perfect temperature (my wife is always cold), has a cheap supply of fresh popcorn and drinks or lets you bring your own goodies (beer/wine/Skittles), starts the movie when YOU want to see it, has comfy seats, allows pets (or is that "pests"   ), will pause the show in case you need to go to the bathroom, allows you to text (pausing optional), can jump from movie to music party on the fly, doesn't smell funny, doesn't have sticky floors, if the people next to or behind you are too loud, you can tell them to be quiet/get out/or just turn up the volume, so on...

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

[shmokes]

Counter-point: How many movie theaters are the perfect temperature (my wife is always cold), has a cheap supply of fresh popcorn and drinks or lets you bring your own goodies (beer/wine/Skittles), starts the movie when YOU want to see it, has comfy seats, allows pets (or is that "pests"  ), will pause the show in case you need to go to the bathroom, allows you to text (pausing optional), can jump from movie to music party on the fly, doesn't smell funny, doesn't have sticky floors, if the people next to or behind you are too loud, you can tell them to be quiet/get out/or just turn up the volume, so on...

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

By far the biggest problem with a commercial theater is simply selection. What if you didn't get a chance to catch, say, Xmen: First Class last summer? What are you gonna do if you wanna see it? You gotta watch it at home. What if you feel like watching Dr. Zhivago? Gotta watch it at home. And so on. There are about eleventy bajillion more movies in existence than there are playing at your local movie theaters.

[drventure]

EDIT: Long post deleted because I couldn't clearly communicate that a large projection setup can be awesome without having to spend a ton.  It came across just wrong.

+1 on that. I found a motorized tab tensioned screen off CL for 250$ (a fixed screen is WAY cheaper, but you have to be able to dedicate some wall space, and I didn't want to, though, now, that's probably the way I'd go if I do it again), and a Panasonic Ae-900U project off ebay for 300$.

I've read that buying a can of screengoo and a good sponge roller and some MDF gets you very good screen for a fraction of that price.

I can also see the benefits of a set it down, run a cable, and you're done big LCD or plasma. A lot of the choice comes down to personal preference and how/what you typically watch.

[saint]

If you're not buying your cables from monoprice.com, you're paying too much as a rule (though that ebay deal was a score).

+1,000,000

EDIT: Long post deleted because I couldn't clearly communicate that a large projection setup can be awesome without having to spend a ton.  It came across just wrong.

Gah, I thought it was well written and I wish you'd left it

[Gray_Area]

A quick google search of hotabiz.com review doesn't make me want to give them any money.

Plus $315 (let alone $287) for a 55-inch tv is bogus.  That TV should be around the $1000-$1500 price range.

Either they are scamming to steal your money, or they are scamming to get you to pay $1000 shipping.  Either way, it is a scam or shady at best, and that isn't very promising.

I did a search but nothing, not even 'review', shows anything significant. Certainly looks scammy. But you never know. Asian markets have cheap stuff. Would $200 shipping be worth it if the item costs retail $800, and you're getting it for $400?

[Ond]

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

No. Sorry, but this is not necessarily so.  Pompous mode on: [Come over to my place and I'll radically adjust your thinking on this. Sure a cheap all in one sound system is not going to reproduce big commercial theatre sound, but it is possible to not only match the experience but it exceed it with high fidelity consumer systems. It's also a matter of space, in a large or even medium theatre 7500 watts  is appropriate, in a home theatre the same quality can be achieved with wattage appropriate to that space.  A well matched and configured system with powerful subs can reproduce the wide dynamic range and quality of a commercial theatre.] Pompous mode off.  

[Ond]

I've read that buying a can of screengoo and a good sponge roller and some MDF gets you very good screen for a fraction of that price.

Out where I am screengoo worked out more expensive than the cost of a fixed 110" screen, so I went with the screen.

[saint]

My buddy built me a fixed 100" screen for less than $200. Works a treat.

[shponglefan]

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

But the 20' screen and 7500 watt sound system is also meant for a much larger space at a much greater viewing distance.

Personally, I have a 92 inch screen, HD projector and 500 watt 7-channel system + 750 watt subwoofer, and I find it gives comparable experience to a real movie theater.  Minus the annoying whispering, crinkling of candy wrappers or cell phones.

[shponglefan]

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

No. Sorry, but this is not necessarily so.  Pompous mode on: [Come over to my place and I'll radically adjust your thinking on this. Sure a cheap all in one sound system is not going to reproduce big commercial theatre sound, but it is possible to not only match the experience but it exceed it with high fidelity consumer systems. It's also a matter of space, in a large or even medium theatre 7500 watts  is appropriate, in a home theatre the same quality can be achieved with wattage appropriate to that space.  A well matched and configured system with powerful subs can reproduce the wide dynamic range and quality of a commercial theatre.] Pompous mode off.  

^ This.

IMHO, I've found a good subwoofer properly EQ'd can exceed the quality of low-end in a commercial theater.  At least in my experience.

[saint]

There's also subjective size. I sit 2/3 back in a movie theater. The screen is a certain subjective size. I sit much closer in my home theater. The subjective size is pretty close match. These days, we prefer watching a movie in our home theater than out. If for no other reason, there is always some jackass talking or txting during the movie. No exaggeration, at least 3 of the last 4 or 5 movies we've been to in a theater have had someone being a jackass that way. Infuriating.

I also pay a ton less for food/drinks, set the temperature where we want it, eat/drink whatever we want, etc. Home theater is where it's at for us. We host movie night parties with our friends that are always a good time. We did obscure science fiction movie night one time, martial arts night another. Before the avengers we did a re-watching of Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, etc.

Again, to each their own, and there's a lot to be said for dropping in a TV and being done with it without much fuss, but I believe the majority of folks who get to try someone's home theater with a projector would want to have one of their own.

[nickbuol]

Well, most of those are usually nonissues at a decent theater.  But the easiest counterpoint is that a 100" screen with a consumer surround sound system is also absolutely nothing like a good movie theater.  At all.  That's an important part of the comparison.  It's not just the environment.  It's also 20' of screen size and about 7500 watts of sound system.

7500 watts (I know, made up number, but I get the point) is for large rooms.  You need to fill massive air volumes.  Plus you need to understand that watts can start becoming somewhat meaningless.  I mean, take a receiver with 7 powered channels (plus the sub output of course) at 100 watts each.  Some other company may have the same thing at 125 watts per channel, but you would be hard pressed to notice any really volume difference with the extra 175 watts.  It just doesn't work the way that people think it does.  I can say this that at 700 watts plus subwoofers (nothing too monsterous) and it will be a LOT louder than your local theater, even at well under max power.  Pair that power with good circuitry and speakers that can reproduce clean sound at high volumes, and you are almost there.

I have only heard a movie in a theater maybe a handful of times where I didn't think that it would sound as good or better at home.  A nice IMAX theater that I've been to, and the El Capitan Theatre in Hollywood (has the brand new, fully calibrated, played at deafening reference level, Dolby Atmos.  

I'm not talking HTIB setups with crap speakers (been there myself), but something a little decent with treated wall/floor/ceilings just like the big theaters.   A hard surface box with the world's best speakers will still sound muddy and terrible with peaks and valleys all over the frequency range and different depending on where you are in the room.

Maybe you have some top 20 theater in your area and the "best" you've heard is Bose.  It is hard for me to know, and theaters are definitely NOT for everyone. However, hit up the AVS forum http://www.avsforum.com/ and you will find that the hobby of home theater is HUGE and most people rarely ever step into a commercial theater again once they have one in their house.

Again, not for everyone, just like BYOArcades and such.  Nothing wrong with going out to movies either, just don't be quite too quick to judge the home theater experience.

[nickbuol]

Gah, I thought it was well written and I wish you'd left it

LOL. I could PM you a copy. 

[nickbuol]

I also pay a ton less for food/drinks, set the temperature where we want it, eat/drink whatever we want, etc. Home theater is where it's at for us. We host movie night parties with our friends that are always a good time. We did obscure science fiction movie night one time, martial arts night another. Before the avengers we did a re-watching of Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, etc.

Just don't do a LOTR extended edition marathon.  Been there, done that...  Even with breaks to swap discs, between movies, for food, etc, it is TOO much sitting engulfed in the world of hobbits, elfs, and dwarfs...  And I love those movies.

[saint]

I also pay a ton less for food/drinks, set the temperature where we want it, eat/drink whatever we want, etc. Home theater is where it's at for us. We host movie night parties with our friends that are always a good time. We did obscure science fiction movie night one time, martial arts night another. Before the avengers we did a re-watching of Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, etc.

Just don't do a LOTR extended edition marathon.  Been there, done that...  Even with breaks to swap discs, between movies, for food, etc, it is TOO much sitting engulfed in the world of hobbits, elfs, and dwarfs...  And I love those movies.

Too late, we totally did that (over the course of a 3-day weekend)

[Ond]

I've really got to go do some actual work on my HT today rather than mess about reading stuff here, but a final comment on projectors, PB Jim made a comment earlier about projectors being the best the 90's had to offer which made me think about the rapid progression of the technology in general.  1080P has only just been around at an affordable price for a few years and already 4K technology is in the high end of the market.  The projector scene will only get better over the next few years. Many commercial theatres themselves are equipped with both 4K units and traditional 35mm projection systems, the filter down into the home market is assured.  Projectors need a dark room for the best results, yes you can use them in a lit room but its a compromise.   If you're tending toward a multipurpose usage in a lit room I'd still consider the largest TV unit you can afford.  It's not a theatre like experience, but then it depends on what you're aiming for.

[saint]

Well, the "I have to see this now" factor is strong. We saw the Avengers in the theater, we'll see the next Batman in the theater. But we are waiting to see the new Spiderman when it comes out on blu-ray... I'd say we see about 1/3rd of the movies in the theater that we used to once we got the home setup. There are some movies though that we just wouldn't wait for.

[nickbuol]

You can cram all 3 movies onto one DVDR DL in reasonably high def.  New Line splitting those movies across two discs was a marketing gimmick.

    

[ed12]

ahh
going out is fun
u get to hold hand's
kiss,buy popcorn,pop,look at all the the other ppl
look around a mall etc etc
buy something u have benn thinking about

ed

[shmokes]

Is that a poem?

[Le Chuck]

Is that a poem?

If you have to ask you'll never know Daddy-O

[ChadTower]

Well, the "I have to see this now" factor is strong. We saw the Avengers in the theater, we'll see the next Batman in the theater.

When we have to see it now we go to the IMAX.  There is no potential argument for anything in the home being a reasonable replacement for seeing The Dark Knight at IMAX.

Of course, when the movie ends up sucking like the last two Harry Potter movies, that's $75 into the toilet.

[shmokes]

The last two Harry Potter movies were by far the best of the series. What would have possessed you to go spend $75 to see sucky movies 7 and 8* when you had already seen the first 6 even suckier Harry Potter films?







* Frankly, I thought the last two films were quite good for the most part

[ChadTower]

I thought they were awful and made little sense at times.  That's a different conversation for a different thread. 

[nickbuol]

Chad, we don't have any *real* IMAX theaters here where I live.  The closest IMAX is 2 hours away and is a "dome" theater in a Science Center.  Not good.

There is a Century Theater there too with their "XD" setup, but I've need been to it since they added the XD setup.

I travel pretty much monthly for work, and most of the metro areas I travel are in big(ger) cities like Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, Denver, Charlotte, etc...  I will admit that I ALWAYS check to see what is playing at one of the local IMAX theaters when I am traveling.  To date, after 3 years of monthly travel, I have only seen a small handful of movies at an IMAX.  It seems like some of the places are playing the new movies, or blockbuster ones for only a couple of weeks (when I am not travelling) and then when I am there, it is something stupid or a movie the just doesn't seem like IMAX would be the right format for... This happened with one of the Twilight movies.  No thanks on ANY screen, but on IMAX?  Yes, it happened to me.  The one theater was playing something worthwhile (don't recall what anymore) right up until I started my travel.  

[shmokes]

I thought they were awful and made little sense at times.

Perhaps the movies were made under the (almost totally reasonable, lol) assumption that every single person watching the film had already read the book. I never found it to be nonsensical, but I don't rule out the possibility that this is because I already had information in my head that automatically filled in any gaps in the film's narrative. I don't know that this is the case. I just know that I thought the movies were pretty good, and by far the best of the series. The first two movies, for example, are pretty wretched. And the third is only marginally better, IIRC.

[ChadTower]

Twilight on IMAX does seem like a waste of time unless you're a 14 year old girl.  Then again, so was everything else about those movies.

I just looked at the full list of IMAXes.  I can't find a direct link to the map view but if you go to map and zoom out it shows there are like 300 of them in the eastern half of the US and a ton on the west coast.  There aren't as many in the midwest.  I was surprised to see that there are eight of them within 75 minutes of my house (two are museums and only show the documentary type stuff).  There are a lot more IMAXes than I thought.

[ChadTower]

veggie burgers

It's always good when they bring you a coaster for your beer.

[nickbuol]

Thanks for the link Chad.  I didn't realize that there was a "real" IMAX (non-dome) anywhere near me.  Happens that there is one, but it is still an hour and 40 minutes away.   

And Jim, thank you (I guess) for the visuals on your "waitresses."

[DillonFoulds]

...If you buy any descent-quality TV today...

Just had to say, I find this the absolutely most appropriate typo that I've ever read.

[lilshawn]

Is that a poem?

I once spent two weeks
speak entirely haiku
walmart checkout stares

Haiku are the bomb
it's perfect for OCD
it has stuff to count

Haiku IS plural
They say haikus are stupid
Who's stupid now (ass)

 

[Vigo]

Just to clarify, IMAX slaps their label on much smaller screens and the company does not differentiate between them. It still officially carries the IMAX label. If you go to a theater that says it displays IMAX, you might be getting hosed into going to a movie with a screen 1/4th the size. The image also not only in a smaller size, but a worse resolution as well.

[ChadTower]

I did wonder about that.  They really should specify when it's IMAX Certified rather than a full IMAX. 

I know in my area we have 3 full IMAXes for sure plus a dome at the Boston Museum of Science and a full but only science films IMAX at the Boston Aquarium.  There were a couple others listed that could be Certified. 

[ChadTower]

This is NYC!  Erm, I mean Gotham City!  It's not that taxi you need to see.  It's the 15th taxi from the left.

[nickbuol]

I found the perfect theater for Jim.



19" tube tv, a dish receiver, some seats, some decorations, a "rug" for comfort....  ooo and Bass Shakers on the seats...  Don't forget the popcorn machine!

Just teasing you Jim!

[ChadTower]

Jim would be using an OTA antenna.

[DillonFoulds]

Nope, the digital ota is too clear, gotta be the freebie cable channels, over classic analogue signals!

[Gray_Area]

Well. I settled on - though I don't think I settled for - a used 50 Panasonic plasma via CL, for $420 (and a trip across town; nice family man dude upgrading to a larger LED-LCD). It doesn't have a PC input, but he gave me an HDMI to DVI cable, and my laptop figured it straight away. (Also now that I'm getting at least 130mbp via wireless, streaming high def is just fine.)

Yes, the opposite wall is a 'full square', and I may decide to switch the couch and display. I could in the future go 100" screen if I get the itch.

Also, just for prettiness' sake, the second image is what greeted me coming out of Walmart yesterday.

[shmokes]

Well done. My 4-5 year old 42" LCD panel and I are jealous.   

[nickbuol]

Nice find Gray...

Jim, honestly, I used to get my local channels in SD and HD with an OTA for a while.  I was surprised how well it actually worked.

[ChadTower]

My big TV is in the basement.  I get one very poor CBS signal down there.  It's just not worth running a line out of my basement and up to the roof for anything on network TV.   

[Vigo]

Get direct TV and have them do the wiring for you. Then, before the 14 day grace period is up, cancel out. They will might take the dish back but they will leave the wiring. If they leave the dish, or at least the dish mount, then you wont even need to buy an antenna mount, and you get free antenna wiring to your roof. 



Before anyone gets uppity here, I'm not really suggesting this.

[ChadTower]

Heh, I actually already have DirecTV and am about to cancel it.  The dish itself is pointed southwest, which of course means Providence from where I am, and I hate RI stations.  Maybe I could attach an antenna to that mount.  I barely watch anything available on networks, though, so it's not worth the effort.  All the networks are is the same 4 sitcom concepts and cop/hospital dramas.   

[Vigo]

Yeah, I also just used the old direct TV coaxial and dish mount, I bought a $10 TV antenna mast and fit it pretty well into the dish mount. If I remember right, I drilled a hole in the mount so I could run a bolt though the TV mast to secure it better, but it didn't take much work to get it to fit. I went with one of those flat indoor outdoor antennas, it worked great. It came with a signal booster as well.

Although I agree, I don't watch too much network tv as well. I get a lot through streaming. About the only show I watch regularly on Network lately is Fringe. I throw on the occasional cop drama. Of course I need it for football, which is about the only sport I really watch other than maybe the Olympics a bit. There are some interesting channels that pop up over the air though. I have one channel that just plays music videos. Like old school MTV. I end up watching the classic TV channel as well. Honeymooners, Laurel and Hardy...stuff like that. There is also a kids channel that shows mostly low budget cartoons, but mixes in some stuff like He-man that I can watch...with my kid  . Otherwise I have my kid watch PBS, so it is good to have that come in as well. Although modern Sesame Street kinda annoys me.

[Vigo]

There are some interesting channels that pop up over the air though. I have one channel that just plays music videos. Like old school MTV. I end up watching the classic TV channel as well. Honeymooners, Laurel and Hardy...stuff like that.

Yeah, that's CoolTV (music) and MeTV (old shows).  They're both great stations but you gotta sit through a lot of hair loss commercials.  I saw some songs I liked on CoolTV once and didn't have a pen handy.  Sent them an e-mail and they actually responded with a set list.

Ah yeah, that's the names. They are both great to flip to on a whim as long as you don't catch them during the infomercials. That is pretty darn awesome CoolTV send you their set list.

[shmokes]

We recently got a thing in the mail from Comcast that says that we can upgrade from our current expensive, but fast internet-only plan ($69/mo) to the same fast internet plus basic cable for $79/mo.  This is pretty tempting. $10/mo is nothing in exchange for A&E, AMC, Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, and especially ESPN (since that's the only thing that can't be pirated in a satisfying way). But I found myself terrified at the prospect of regaining TV. Cos since we haven't had cable/satellite or an antenna in years and years, we don't watch TV. We watch shows. It's like, "You want to watch Mad Men," or, "Wanna watch an episode of Breaking Bad before we go to bed?" But when you have TV, you sit down and watch TV. You don't necessarily have any idea what you're going to watch. You decide, first and foremost, that you're going to watch TV. Then you flip through 100 channels of garbage to look for something that isn't garbage. And if you don't find something, you generally just decide which piece of garbage is the least offensive and you watch that until something more appealing comes on.

So . . . the $10/mo extra thing is a super good deal. But it's a good deal like super-sizing your meal is a good deal. Still . . . I'd sure like ESPN and maybe having The Daily Show, lol. Probably gonna pass, though.

[ChadTower]

Every now and then my cable company calls me and tells me I can get the most basic cable TV package, bundled with my cable internet, and my bill will go down by $3.  I have to explain each time that I have DirecTV, so I can't "just get the cable and not use it", because the coax copper in my walls is in use by DirecTV.  Some phone reps eventually get it.  Most never do.

[nickbuol]

We watch "shows" too.  I can't remember the last time I've watched live tv.  It is always something recorded, or on Hulu.  I set out to watch something that I want to watch and hate the dreaded "channel surfing."

[Vigo]

So this is "extended basic" then? Regular ol' basic won't come with any of those channels. (And you probably already can get regular basic for free if you are hooked up to internet. AFAIK, Comcast doesn't filter basic channels, probably because it is only network TV and shopping channels.)

If you are mulling over a $79 package, you should take a peek at what speeds/rates are available for you for dsl. A few years ago, I was able to get the qwest (now centurylink) and direct tv package for that same price. The nice thing was I was able to get the dsl at a guaranteed forever price of around $50/mo after taxes. The direct tv package included about whatever I could think of except premium channels like HBO, which were on a 3 month trial. Direct TV came with dvr, so i didn't have to watch much for commercials as well.

The minute the contract on Direct TV expired, of course they jacked up the prices. I had no problem ditching them like an old tire. I still get my DSL (which i like better than my old comcast) for the same price.


Of course, if DSL in your neighborhood blows, then the whole deal blows.

[ChadTower]

Of course, if DSL in your neighborhood blows, then the whole deal blows.

No DSL or FIOS available in my neighborhood.  Cable is it for wired high speed.

[shmokes]

DSL is retarded, literally. FIOS is in my neighborhood; it's all over the damned place in my neighborhood. But it's not precisely where I live yet, lol. And yeah . . . it's extended basic, I guess. All those channels I listed are listed on the ad they sent me.

[Gray_Area]

We recently got a thing in the mail from Comcast that says that we can upgrade from our current expensive, but fast internet-only plan ($69/mo) to the same fast internet plus basic cable for $79/mo.  This is pretty tempting. $10/mo is nothing in exchange for A&E, AMC, Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, and especially ESPN (since that's the only thing that can't be pirated in a satisfying way). But I found myself terrified at the prospect of regaining TV. Cos since we haven't had cable/satellite or an antenna in years and years, we don't watch TV. We watch shows. It's like, "You want to watch Mad Men," or, "Wanna watch an episode of Breaking Bad before we go to bed?" But when you have TV, you sit down and watch TV. You don't necessarily have any idea what you're going to watch. You decide, first and foremost, that you're going to watch TV. Then you flip through 100 channels of garbage to look for something that isn't garbage. And if you don't find something, you generally just decide which piece of garbage is the least offensive and you watch that until something more appealing comes on.

This reads like a comedy sketch. I'm reading it aloud in great fun.

All I need is a couple/few mbp bandwidth, and both cable and DSL offer that (actually at least 7mbp) for $30/mo. I can stream in one room, surf in another, torrent in another.....only two of those will I be doing at a time, and I'm the sole occupant. Life is good.

[lilshawn]

DSL is retarded

i have dsl and it's just fine. I get consistant 1200KB/sec speeds (10Mb/sec) and it's $30 a month. 

cable internet is very near the same speed for 45.

i ditched the "cable" tv about 5 months ago. no regrets.

[ChadTower]

i have dsl and it's just fine. I get consistant 1200KB/sec speeds (10Mb/sec) and it's $30 a month. 

It varies heavily by area.

[shmokes]

3Mb/sec here. Which is pretty much dialup.

[lilshawn]

i have dsl and it's just fine. I get consistant 1200KB/sec speeds (10Mb/sec) and it's $30 a month. 

It varies heavily by area.

well I get what's advertised. which is uncommon. I know they say "up to" but The fella I talked to while we did the installation a few months ago, said they have the capability to supply much MUCH faster internet with even old technology... but they actually artificially keep it slow to encourage customers to upgrade to the next high speed level. They pretty much keep it as slow as possible. If people knew how fast the internet can be (take a look at the speeds in japan it's about 30 times faster than the fastest internet we can get in north america.) when they run it wide open it's disgusting.

[Gray_Area]

well I get what's advertised. which is uncommon. I know they say "up to" but The fella I talked to while we did the installation a few months ago, said they have the capability to supply much MUCH faster internet with even old technology... but they actually artificially keep it slow to encourage customers to upgrade to the next high speed level. They pretty much keep it as slow as possible. If people knew how fast the internet can be (take a look at the speeds in japan it's about 30 times faster than the fastest internet we can get in north america.) when they run it wide open it's disgusting.

Only in america. And I love america. I love america. (Bonus points for knowing whose song that is.)

Anyways, here's some shots from an 80s movie, last night. I kept marveling at the picture quality. Growing up, I saw perhaps only thirty movies in the theatre, having seen most movies at home on cable, and it's a kind of new experience watching those movies on this set-up. By the way, the file size of this movie shown is only 2.3gb. Even better that this is on a laptop that, while it's a core centrino and has 3gb memory and 384mb video memory, is only a 1.8 dual core with Intel video, and it producing no artifacting and smooth motion.

[shmokes]

That story doesn't make much sense. Fiber is only useful where it is laid. That is, if they ran fiber to your building or to your neighborhood, that can't just be given away to someone. What good to the DHS College Station setup is a bunch of fiber that's physically buried in the ground leading to various residential neighborhoods? The College Station can only use fiber that's been physically run to its location. Am I missing something?

[lilshawn]

That story doesn't make much sense. Fiber is only useful where it is laid. That is, if they ran fiber to your building or to your neighborhood, that can't just be given away to someone. What good to the DHS College Station setup is a bunch of fiber that's physically buried in the ground leading to various residential neighborhoods? The College Station can only use fiber that's been physically run to its location. Am I missing something?

yes, you are. they pull a line from the main distribution station (most likely los angeles where the fiber optic lines that come from asia enter north america)  and get it to the next town/city then place a substation there... so on and so forth until it reaches a neighborhood in your town/city.

there is basically a main trunk line of several thousand gigabits per second that link the continents...to the main distribution stations where it gets chopped up to several hundred gigabyte lines between several hundred substations in major citys. It is then chopped up again to several gigabit lines and sent to various smaller citys and towns where it gets distributed again to neigborhoods and finally to houses.

so even with fiber optic, you still only receive a small portion of the whole, albeit it's still a shitton of data. Most internet service providers (cable DSL etc) have fiberoptic, they just convert in their own substation to use it with their system. This is why the internet is capable of much faster speeds.

the aforementioned line they installed is only a small portion of the lines fanning out from the substation in the city. The college station simply took over the majority of the throughput from the substation (or the distribution line coming into the substation all together). A dick move still.

[shmokes]

The college station simply took over the majority of the throughput from the substation (or the distribution line coming into the substation all together).

What do you mean took over? It sounds to me like it had never been turned on. And in any case, if there's still fiber running to all the all the houses, surely the College Station taking over a chunk of throughput can't be that big an issue (or even an issue at all). If they ever want to light up all that fiber, even if the College Station thing is using too much bandwidth, all they've gotta do is run another line to the substation. It's not like all that taxpayer-funded infrastructure was just appropriated for something else--I mean, unless there's more to this story than what's been given so far . . .

edit: Bear in mind . . . I'm not trying to be difficult. My understanding of this is limited. I totally embrace the possibility that I'm wrong here. My argument is based almost entirely on intuition . . . it just doesn't seem to add up for me.

[lilshawn]

i would say you're probably right...the government does pretty much whatever the hell it wants.

all in the name of liberty and justice for some.

[ChadTower]

I am thinking in this context took over means it was given to them as a dedicated line.  Nobody else uses it for security reasons.  It's not a percentage of total available bandwidth.