Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[benn600]

In my planning stage for my family's likely move in the near future, I would like to hear what you all think of theater equipment at the moment.  We would like to do it very nicely.  Our budget will likely start at $10,000.

We absolutely prefer projectors because we want to try to match our current 100" + screen.  Any of the 1080p projectors seem to start at $4,000 so that's a big chunk.  We may use our current screen or buy a new one.

For audio--the big question--not sure what to do here.  I hear a lot of about good audio and remember a discussion a few weeks back about coaxial speakers that appear to simply be large woofers.  We need 7.1 sound at the minimum but I am planning on adding in-wall wiring for 7.2 (subs on both sides).  What kinds of receivers are available, generally speaking, when considering VERY high audio quality with lots of power?  We typically have used Yamaha Natural Sound receivers but it sounds like they are just common, average receivers.  What is the next step up to get much better than average quality?  I know it is common to associate sound quality with stereo audio but I really need surround for movies.

Any advice is great!

Oh, and I can't forget the actual theater ideas!  Black walls?  Red carpet?  Columns with accent and step lighting?  Leather chairs?  I've been looking for example theaters and found quite a few but don't hesitate to show off your own or let me see some other ones online.  The budget, like I said, probably has to start at $10,000 because the video takes half of that off the bat.  The associated HTPC with Media Center is not important for this theater budget.  Lastly, we may consider some HD disc player which will add slight cost.

[benn600]

I just finished doing some research.  It's simply crazy to say the least.  I guess the best idea would be to go to our local high-end audio store and listen to some things.  I just now found Paradigm and saw that for a complete system, the speakers alone can easily cost $15,000 but that's way out of sight.  They have a different series, the studio series, which is quite a bit less.

I would think that different names/speakers would focus more on quality vs. volume so maybe the studio speakers would have better sound quality with less overall volume capability...

[newsposter]

If you can find one, an Onkyo TX-NR1000, discontinued and not often seen on ebay, a Most Excellent box.  I own two.

As an alternative, a TX-NR905.

Onkyo is currently in the midst of upgrading all of their high-end receivers to switch and manipulate v1.3 HDMI.  One or two of their mid-range receivers are already there albeit without streaming media (ethernet) capabilities.  You need to go to their high-end receivers for that.

[jgreen]

nevermind.

[jmone]

jgreen - loved your post as it is (was) a valid veiw about the role the speakers play and their relative merit.  I too was of the view that I'd plow all my investment into the electronics and that any speaker would do.  I was horrified to hear advice that 50% of your total investment should be in speakers...after all they are just a box with some moving bits.  However, the best advice I got was to take a CD with music you know and compare speakers side by side at a HiFi store.  I'm no audiophile but even I could instantly hear an enormous difference between makes and models & for the first time understood the concepts of "soundstage" reproductions and how it varied between the models on display (and I'm talking 2-Ch).

Benn600 - Most love to recomend their own "wise" choices and I'm no different (I imported a setup to Australia from www.axiomaudio.com and have been very pleased to date).  It is from this site I got the advise of there is no "best" speaker, only the one you like "best".  Regardless of which way you go I would recomend that this is a good site for some research http://axiomaudio.com/newsletter_index.html and have a solid active forum - join up, ask and away you will go....there is much more knowledge there than I will ever be able to provide so don't butcher me if I've got some of the following wrong....A couple of comments I would make (and please I'm not trying to put down anyones existing sytems - if they work for you - great):
1) Small Cube systems just look good....Speakers are air pumps and you need a range of sizes to reproduce the frequences needed at the volumes required.  The weakness of the cube systems is they have to pass off mid range freq to the so called "sub" as sound is directional (down to 20-25hz???) so you're going to stuggle with a relistic soundstage on these systems.
2) 2Ch to me sounds far better for well recorded music if you sit in the sweet spot and just enjoy the music...if your moving around the house or watching a DVD then crank up your 5.1+ system for all its worth and let the windows rattle! 
3) Unrealistic Power Claims - I'm not sure what the STD US Domestic power circuit can deliver (120v x 15amps??? = 1800w) but by the time you plug in your TV, HTPC, Toaster and all the other bits then divided by the inefficency of your amp & speakers THEN divided by the number of Channels you are driving you really are only got maybe 100w per ch continious power.  Now the good news is that you normally need little power...eg a speaker with a sensitivity rating on 90db will produce this sound pressure level with 1w....the bad thing is that the relationship between power consumption (watts) and sound pressure (db) is exponential so you will quickly reach the limit of the current that can be delivered for ever decreasing increases in sound presure.  For what it is worth I can drive my speakers with a Yami V2700 much louder than is necesary to fill the space of the room.
4) 5.1 vs 6.1 vs 7.1 (or 5.2, 6.2, 7.3 etc):  OK - Very little material is recorded in more than 5.1, However you need to consider the size and shape of your room in designing the number and placement of the speakers.  Even in movie theaters they may only process 5.1 but may put it out of dozens of speakers and multiple subs.  I'd suggest sending the room details to the Axiom people (or post on the board) and they will advise on a suitable setup.

Thanks
Nathan

[benn600]

This will likely be a brand new built house and therefore, the theater can be configured to fit the house -- not the other way around.  It is still probably months + off so there is plenty of time.  I am thinking 7.2 is the way to go.  We already have 7.1.  Although I'm not sure if 7.2 receivers are available.  I'm mainly referring to having dual subs (one on each side of the room) to provide a more uniform sound with less requirement for each individual sub.

I believe half should be sound.

Now other than the projector at ~$4K-5 I'm trying to think...I guess there would be 9 speakers plus the receiver and cables.  I won't worry about cables.  So ten pieces total!

[BartMan01]

The best speaker advice I can give is to get the exact same speakers for Front, Center, and Surround Left, Center, and Right.  Don't get 'matched' speakers, get the exact same ones.

5.1 is all most people "need".
7.1 really only makes a big difference for large rooms.
If you have the budget to go 7.1 (extra speaker cost) I would not try to dissuade you from doing so.

If you have more than one row of seating, really think about speaker placement for the surrounds.  It may even be necessary to have multiple speakers along the side wall.

Dual subs is a great idea, but try out one on each sidewall vs. one on the sidewall and one on the front wall to see what gives you better fill/sound.

As to receivers - consider getting separates.  Or getting a receiver with pre-outs and use an external amp (or amps) to drive the speakers

[benn600]

I would like two possibly three rows of seating.  We were thinking two rows of 3 leather chairs and possibly a couch in the front but maybe not.  I was thinking it would be neat if the extra 2 speakers would just mimic the 5.1 surround speakers so both rows would get the necessary surround aimed at their ears.

Why would you get the SAME speakers for front and rear?!  lol!  No way...EVER!  Unless you are using tiny speakers!  I'm not putting 7-speaker Paridigm 3-way floor speakers all over the place!  The rear speakers need very little bass at all while the fronts can do well with some bass.

[BartMan01]

Although I'm not sure if 7.2 receivers are available.

No such beast exists (or is necessary).  There is only one sub channel regardless of how many subs you are driving.  Some receivers have multiple outs for subs, but it is easy to just add a 'y' connector.

[BartMan01]

Why would you get the SAME speakers for front and rear?!

Sorry, PEBKAC error:  I meant to say "Left, Center, and Right".

[BartMan01]

I would like two possibly three rows of seating.  We were thinking two rows of 3 leather chairs and possibly a couch in the front but maybe not.  I was thinking it would be neat if the extra 2 speakers would just mimic the 5.1 surround speakers so both rows would get the necessary surround aimed at their ears.

That sounds more like you want a 5.1 system with 4 (instead of 2) side speakers.  In a 7.1 setup 2 surround speakers are placed to the sides and 2 are placed at the rear with different audio coming from them.

[benn600]

I've heard that 2 or even 4 subs is one of the next steps in multi speaker environments and it would be somewhat helpful because then there would be somewhat better bass surrounding you plus explosions would occur at the correct location in relation to you and where they should sound like they are occurring.

[newsposter]

I may have mentioned this before, but you should check out the airline surplus dealers at Mohave Airport (California) for slightly-used airline First-Class leather seating.  Very comfy in a HT environment.  Built-in cup holders and everything. Built to last, etc, etc.

As far as speakers go, you can always go with a single well-powered sub in the room somewhere and use 'seat shakers' to amplify the sub-bass perception.  Seat shakers are far more effective in delivering that punch than a pile of subs.  Less damaging to the plaster too.

Don't discount the possibility of running a headphone line to each seating position.  That way you can watch your movies on the Big Screen with Big Sound and not wake up everyone else in the house.  Wireless headphones, even the newest bluetooth ones, are crap and horribly expensive compared to the best of the wired/traditional headphones.  Wireless headphones of all kinds suffer from interference on the 800/2100bt/2800/5600 Mhz bands.  Not worth the hassle or even the cool-ness factor.  Just run pre-amp'd lines to each seat, provide a local amp and volume control, and you're all set.

[BartMan01]

I've heard that 2 or even 4 subs is one of the next steps in multi speaker environments and it would be somewhat helpful because then there would be somewhat better bass surrounding you plus explosions would occur at the correct location in relation to you and where they should sound like they are occurring.

2 subs are definitely the way to go for any 'normal' in-home theater if you have the budget and the space.  One thing you appear (to me) to be misusing and can cause some confusion is the whole A.B terminology on surround decoding. 

A = number of discrete main channels of audio.
B = number of discrete effect (subwoofer) channels of audio.

You can have a 5.1 system with 1 left, 1 center, 1 right, 2 left surrounds, 2 right surrounds, and 2 subs.  This does not make it a '7.2' system, it is still a 5.1 system just with 9 total speakers.

7.1 = 5.1 + two additional surround channels on the back wall facing forward.

[benn600]

I understand the distinction.  I would like 7.1 discrete and then the best idea would be to have two subs that would just be y-adaptered out.  Then, I would take the two main surrounds and y-adapter them out.  What's the best way to do this?  I know there are some impedance issues.  These would aim directly in towards the ears--immediately to the side of the two rows of seating.  Then, the last surround backs would be in the back aiming at the backs of the heads, somewhat higher with a slight downward angle to help catch both the upper and lower levels.

Wired headphones is an amazing idea!  What hardware do I need?  What's the best way to run the cables to each seat?  This will probably be on concrete with carpet.

[BartMan01]

2 sets of surrounds on the side is where pre-outs/external amps come in handy.  The 'best' way to do it would be to Y-out the pre-outs to 2 different amps then run each speaker off it's own amp.

[benn600]

Would you mind explaining the issue of external amplifiers a bit?  I don't think I have ever used or even seen standalone amplifiers.  In a very high end system do people usually get a Yamaha receiver and then use only the pre-outs?  This would leave the internal amplifier alone.

I remember reading in our Yamaha receiver's manual that you can use the pre-outs and then an external amplifier.  Then I started thinking why would anyone spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to get more features + a better, more powerful amplifier, and then not even use it!  What a waste!

[newsposter]

Look at the professional audio and home entertainment sections at www.bhphotovideo.com for ideas.

BH PHoto is one of the last places that actually prints and distributes (for Free!!) glossy printed catalogs of some several hundred pages.

As a bonus, their prices are hard to beat and they are a very well-known/reputable seller.

[BartMan01]

Would you mind explaining the issue of external amplifiers a bit?

The amps in receivers have gotten better, but stand alone amps still have their advantages.  These days the performance gap has narrowed, but separate amps are generally still made with higher quality components and are able to deliver their rated power even when all channels are being driven hard (something most receivers can't do).  If I didn't already have 5 good monoblock amps from the original transition to discrete digital surround sound (my first Dolby digital decoder was an external one), I would just be using the amps in my receivers.

Things you can do with separate amps:
Run multiple speakers for a single channel without having to worry about overloading the single amp.
Bi-amp your speakers:  some speakers have separate terminals for the bass and mid/high.  You can run one amp to the bass drivers and another to the mid/high drivers.  This in theory gives you cleaner mid/high since the amp no longer has to deal with the power hungry bass.  In real life your mileage may vary.
Use a pre-amp instead of a receiver.  Many higher-end systems separate the amplifier section from the processing section. 
Put the amps near the speakers to minimize the distance of the speaker cable run.

[benn600]

The biggest problem for me is that yes, people really just need to listen to the stuff and make their best judgment.  You can't just spend x dollars for a good system or 2x dollars for a much better system -- generally speaking.  If I'm going to spend 2x dollars, I want to get the best sound for those 2x dollars, obviously.  I am thinking we have a high end audio store that I need to check out.

If you wanted a 7.2 audio system, probably with only 7.1 discrete channels and then: 2 subs and double surround speakers (not surround back), that would mean 9 speakers plus 2 self-powered subwoofers.  Would you need 9 amplifiers?  And 18 if you separate highs from lows?  18 power plugs?  lol

If you were going for just stereo sound, I would think it would be pretty reasonable to get amazing sound because you don't have to worry about the extra channels for surround sound--meaning better receiver, more speakers, more cable, etc.  So I'm thinking that some people might invest a lot in their front speakers with dedicated amps and then use the internal amp for other speakers?  If you do that, the receiver's amp should easily be able to power the center and rears because it no longer has to worry about the front speakers, which would pre-out to an amp.

[benn600]

Let me reveal our current theater setup.  It was put together on a very low budget and essentially to get some kind of idea on how to do it right a little later.  We have learned a lot from our current setup that will help going forward.

http://www.amazon.com/Jensen-JP1300-Reflex-Speaker-Single/dp/B00005LAC4

http://www.yamaha.co.jp/english/product/av/products/ht/rxv650.html

http://cgi.ebay.com/Yamaha-RX-V650-Home-Theater-Receiver_W0QQitemZ140140491860QQihZ004QQcategoryZ1499QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

For the receiver, I'm not sure what the difference is but Yamaha's web site now shows the same receiver colored gold!  lol.  And it looks like it has a lot more power!  The eBay shows what I recall being accurate information: 95 watts x 7.  But for that power I get pretty much all the power I could want.  The receiver did turn off twice or so randomly, which indicates over driving--BUT I had the volume VERY low so it may have been something strange.

As you'll see, the front speakers were around $100 each and the subwoofer was less than $200, Sony 12".  The rear speakers are some older KLH speakers (2-way) that sound nice.  The surround-backs were probably $30 each or so, Sony.  The center channel is also an older speaker but it also has some good sound quality and power.

The projector is VGA resolution and was $600 after a large price drop about 2-3 years ago.  The receiver was an amazing deal at around $300 brand new on eBay when everyone else was selling it for $400-$550.

Everything was very reasonable and costs were kept quite low while still providing a very nice system.  It helped that we already had lots of cable, 3 speakers, and other components we're using in this system.

So around $1,600 I would say for everything with slight accounting for the pieces we already had.  Now we're looking at spending 3 times that on the video alone plus possibly a HD disc format player and a much nicer audio setup.

We are very satisfied with this theater system so it's going to be a stretch to impress us (and me) beyond this budget but decent system.

The projector is an NEC and we are very pleased with it.

[benn600]

I really want 9.2!!  I want two more speakers--one on each side placed between the front speaker and the surround speaker.  This would provide a middle position between these speakers to smooth the swoosh as things fly around you!  That plus the surrounds and two surround backs and I think you've got an amazing setup.

How long until better than 5.1 starts getting encoded to discs?  I know 5.1 is standard but why don't they add 6.1 or better?  It's out there and ready to be used, isn't it?

9.2 discrete channels would be amazing and within reach!  That wouldn't be crazily expensive because the added speakers would not even be as important as the surrounds plus they would have some extra power coming from the front speakers since they would be close to eachother.

[benn600]

How does one graph their frequency response?  I have a sound level meter that reads sound pressure out in dB.  Do you simply play tones at various frequencies not adjusting the volume or equalizing the audio and then record the dB output of each tone?  Any suggestions on where I could get sample tones or where I could get some?  I'll look around, too.

I did play a piano song and could hear a lot of bad noise on certain piano notes.  It may simply be related to the room environment and the speaker housing.  It was almost like things were rattling.  Whenever I listen to music and wherever I do, I am just used to rattling stuff all over.  That would be one of the best improvements I could make of all--just if I could cut most or all of the rattling sounds out.  However, during this particular piece it sounded like there was some rattling coming from the surround speaker (right).  It only was heard at certain notes (tones).

I plan on making a trip to Best Buy today to listen to some stuff.  If we have a $5K budget for audio--I'm thinking close to $2K for the receiver.  I saw an Onkyo with 4 HDMI in and 2 HDMI out + ethernet for software updates, etc.  But I typically prefer Yamaha just from having one and knowing people with them.  It was just under $2K on bhphotovideo.  How much needs to be spent on the receiver?  Inputs are very important, obviously.  Power doesn't hurt either.

I remember Best Buy pushing JBL but I think I will look for their Infinity speakers as well and glance at Bose and some of the others.  I'm not a big fan of tiny satellite speakers from anyone and that is what Bose often creates.  However, I'm guessing that Best Buy doesn't have much of the really high end market at all.

[BartMan01]

How does one graph their frequency response?  I have a sound level meter that reads sound pressure out in dB.  Do you simply play tones at various frequencies not adjusting the volume or equalizing the audio and then record the dB output of each tone?  Any suggestions on where I could get sample tones or where I could get some?  I'll look around, too.

There is specialized equipment/software for this.

I plan on making a trip to Best Buy today to listen to some stuff.  If we have a $5K budget for audio--I'm thinking close to $2K for the receiver.

Do yourself a favor and go to a 'real' audio dealer.  Give them your budget and see what they can do.

One of the biggest improvements you can make to the sound is treating the room dynamics.

Check this out:  http://www.guidetohometheater.com/news/10388/index.html

[jmone]

How does one graph their frequency response?  I have a sound level meter that reads sound pressure out in dB.  Do you simply play tones at various frequencies not adjusting the volume or equalizing the audio and then record the dB output of each tone?  Any suggestions on where I could get sample tones or where I could get some? 

There are a couple of specilist disks around (in particular "AVIA" http://www.ovationmultimedia.com/avia.html ) that has a set of different test tones etc that then lets you balance your AV setup.

[benn600]

Do yourself a favor and go to a 'real' audio dealer.  Give them your budget and see what they can do.

On step ahead of you.  Today I stopped by one of our professional audio dealers.  They shows off a $15,000 1080p projector with a cinemascope (?) screen that had motorized adjusters to fix the aspect ratio.  I was somewhat disappointed that their most expensive speakers were $4K for a pair (front floor standing).  I felt like they could have had some higher end ones.  However, they had all the component amps, receivers, etc. that I cared to see.

I was leaning towards the $2K per pair Energy speakers.  It's all dependent on the budget we finally decided to spend on this--we're still a few months out at least.

So I went to Best Buy also after this other store--wow they have changed!  Only a few months back they had a dedicated listening room.  I visited two other Best Buy's this summer and when I returned I found ours had completely updated to match the other ones!  They basically took out their dedicated listening rooms and condensed to less than half the speakers overall with listening environments right out in the floor--a horrible area to consider testing speakers!  It's garbage!  Their most expensive were just over $800 a pair for front speakers.  That's okay but I want to at least compare with higher end speakers and that seems slightly low for our above average interest in this theater.

We have another high end store that I would like to visit and probably will tomorrow.  Now the question is price!  I mean add a thousand dollars or so for a wireless remote with custom lighting all controllable from the remote, etc., prices start adding up!  Another few hundred for a headphone splitter/amp, power cleaner, battery, projector, screen, cables!  It's easy to spend $2K on front speakers but when you add everything else up it seems horribly expensive.

All a work in progress!

Do we really want to spend $25,000 on a theater?!  You could buy a car!  I know we don't want to waste money for minimal increases.

I saw a 720p Sony projector at Best Buy for $1,300!  The 1080p projectors are usually $4K +.

[benn600]

These look incredible.  Although it looks like it would be $18,500 for 7.1 (lol).

I really don't think that would be a good purchase!  Oh and if I want dual subs and an extra surround row (for second seating row), that would add another $6,500 or so...

http://www.paradigm.com/en/reference/fronts-signature-signatures8-model-2-17-1-34.paradigm#

http://www.paradigm.com/en/reference/centers-signature-signaturec5-model-3-17-1-36.paradigm

http://www.paradigm.com/en/reference/subwoofers-signature-signatureadp3-model-4-17-1-37.paradigm
(times 2 for surround-back)

http://www.paradigm.com/en/reference/subwoofer-signature-signatureservo-model-5-17-4-12.paradigm

I sincerely doubt we would ever actually go for this because it's the price of a decent automobile.  But does anyone have thoughts?  Would it really be "that good?"

The worse question is: so what amplifier then?  Would I be compelled to get component stuff?  And then you need more expensive speaker wire!  That's the drawback to high-end anything!  It increases the price of everything else, too!  It's not just the initial eighteen thousand dollar price tag.  It's the increase from a nice $2K receiver to probably $5K for the receiver & amp.  And a few hundred dollars + in nice speaker wire.

[BartMan01]

See if you can find a dealer with these set up:
http://www.klipsch.com/products/details/thx-ultra2.aspx

LCR + 4 surrounds = 6100 MSRP (actual street price should be lower)
2 subs and the amp = 3900 MSRP

So for a 5.1 setup with 2 sets of surrounds and 2 subs:  $10,000 MSRP

If I was in the market for speakers right now those would be at the top of my list.

[jgreen]

benn--

Just a thought:

I have friends with expensive ($25,000 +) home theater setups.  I also have one or two friends who bought Ferraris.  While the Ferrari people and the home theater people surprisingly don't overlap, I can tell you (from a distance) that the urge to buy a Ferrari and the urge to build an expensive home theater come from the same place.  And it's not about enjoying the car or the movie.

IMO, there is no more empty purchase on the planet than a Ferrari--it's too expensive to race and too impractical to drive around.  But an expensive home theater does a good job of coming in second, to my mind.  And it's not just that you're spending a LOT more money than you need to, you're spending it in the wrong place.

Try this on for size:  The more money that gets spent upgrading the home theater room, the more the home theater starts to look like a theater--stiff chairs in rows and cold decor.  If you ask me this is crazy, and motivated by nothing more than novelty and the desire for one-upmanship.  A great home theater should be the most comfy part of the house--beanbag chairs, carpeted risers and a beer fridge every three feet.  Really.  Are you trying to enjoy the movie or are you trying to impress someone?

And as for sound system, I GUARANTEE you that a beer fridge within arm's reach will improve the sound and experience FAR more than throwing $25,000 at the wall.

So.  All I'm saying is, if the benn600 household is intent on going down this slippery spending slope, start slowly now with an expensive (<$5,000) stereo setup, and then compare that to a $300 set of earphones.  The difference will be sobering, and educational.  The reason home theater equipment gets so expensive is that it's so far from your ear, and so large.  And no matter how expensive and large it is, it cannot overcome the handicap of not being pointed exactly at one person's ears.  Again--there is only ONE sweet spot, and only two ears can hear it, no matter how much money you spent.  Hi-fidelity multi-channel audio?  I'm sure it leaves the speakers as hi-fi, but it doesn't make it to your ears that way.

This is why I would not spend a lot of money on multi-channel audio--buy beer instead.  Really.  I wish you could be there for the uncomfortable silence when friends show off their home theaters--and have to shake the dust off the equipment first.  Every expensive dedicated home theater I've toured is the LEAST USED room in the house.  The kids have their own computer-based systems upstairs, the wife would rather listen to the radio in the kitchen, and there's my buddy sitting there in this vast, dark chamber, modeled on some medieval dungeon, bragging hollowly about how much he spent on it. 

[horse]

as Nathan mentions, check out Axiom Audio (axiomaudio.com) you will not find them in the shops and don't be put of by the price. They are cheap because you are buying from the manufacturer, no middle men. They get great reviews. I have a set of M80v2's which I prefered to B&W or Dynaudio's at double the price. They also do custom finishes to match pretty much any decor. You can get the Epic 80 600 http://axiomaudio.com/epic80_600main.html for under 4K if you go with standard finishes. It comes with a DSP based subwoofer and if you add a second one to the system, I hope you get the theatre room built to withstand blast damage. There are some reviews of large Axiom HT setups online. Also check Audioholics http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=18

Did you say what the room dimensions are?
What is the current source material? - from your pevious posts, mainly DVD's sitting on your server. If you are going to use a HTPC, I'd spend some money on a decent video card and keep the 720P system for now. HD from cable, Dish, Directv or OTA?
Plugging a low end graphics card into even a good quality 720P system with a 100" screen will be obvious.
Quantity of speakers is not everything, careful placement and balance will provide more effect than having more cones than an ice cream vendor.

If you gave me 10K to spend, I go with: -

Axiom Epic 80                              $4000
Denon 4306 or Onkyo TX-NR905     $2100
Oppo Universal Player (any)           $200
Custom HTPC                              $1200-1500 depends on how much I spend on the case
PS3 for Blu Ray support                 $600 or maybe splash a little extra and get the drive for the HTPC and not let the kids play games :-)

Spend the rest on cables and an Expresso Machine http://www.wholelattelove.com/Gaggia.cfm so I can stay awake to enjoy it after a days work. Keep the current projector and screen until I have more money.

[benn600]

Great info jpgreen.  I couldn't agree more.

I visited a Paradigm dealer today and they had the S8 setup--the best system.  I've got to say that I still do not have exactly what I want as far as comparison.  I really want a whole bunch of speakers setup in a line so I can switch between them instantly.

We aren't necessarily going for the theater experience 100% at all and I guarantee that we are not spending $25,000 on this system.  Although we could potentially get close to that.  The real question comes down to when we get closer to making a move.  We are still a few months off (+ / - quite a bit)...could be a year or more or we might buy some stuff to enjoy now.  The main issue is that my family may be building a new house and at that point, we will build one room specifically for the theater, with everything as good as we can make it.

I saw that they had the first generation of the S8 speaker system whereas Paradigm now has a newer generation with improved tweeters.  They are selling their older model display for 40%+ off.  Maybe that would be our best choice!  The top of the line just a few months (or years?) back for a much lower price.

Here is just a quick overall estimate with the low end of prices:
$4,000 - $5,000 for the projector.  They showed me a Mitsubishi 1080p projector for $4K which seems very much within reach.
We need at least a 130" screen because we like HUGE.  None of this distance from screen * 2 or 3.  We want * 4 or 5 probably.  Our current screen is way oversized but we like it.  We're willing to sacrifice brightness and color for a huge screen.

$2,000 receiver

And those speakers were around $7,000 or so.  $13,000 ?

Our HTPC I have already customized.  We may have multiple HTPCs for another different room or so because then we don't need our DVD collection accessible since everything is on the server.  I got the price to under $500 each with TV, HDMI, optical audio.  It is an onboard HDMI but I'm thinking that it may be powerful enough.  If not, I'll add a card.  It is a nice, HTPC-like case and very small.  I've added a DVD player for dvds and cds if they are needed.  This will basically eliminate the need for a CD or DVD player.  In my opinion, I don't see why there would be any advantage to a CD or DVD player because the audio especially is simply digital bits that will be processed by the receiver.

One guy told me many high-end audio buffs prefer the red/white RCA connectors from their CD player.  I don't know if I believe this.  Digital just means the receiver does the D->A conversion.

The last thing I want to do is throw a ton of money into a home theater system because I know I would continuously think: I could have saved or spent that money on something different!  Why not have a decent theater AND car.  I guess some just want the theater (no car).  The money would be better saved than spent.

[JimH]

IMO, there is no more empty purchase on the planet than a Ferrari--it's too expensive to race and too impractical to drive around. 

This sounds so familiar.  Any thoughts on women?

[jgreen]

JimH, i have never owned a Ferrari, and my various attempts to own women have blown up in my face. 

[benn600]

Electing for the Studio system instead of the Signature series from Paradigm saves $9,500.  I'm including a second pair of surrounds for the surround-backs.  But the Studio series, being cheaper, has a less impressive finish but black is available as a base.  In the signature series, it is a big upgrade, adding two grand to the total package price!

But the next problem is that the place I went to has the older signature series marked down quite a bit to put it only $2,000 more.  It isn't exactly the Signature series because it has a lower-end center channel, different sub, etc.  But the fronts are the better ones.  Maybe the best choice would be to get the Signature fronts and the Studio for everything else.  This way we would have the best stereo sound with less overly priced --rest of the system stuff--...

[JimH]

I hear you, bro.  I feel your pain.

[jgreen]

JimH--

On a positive note, rentals have worked out quite nicely for me . . .

benn--

You want the secret to happiness, young man?  Take two bricks and smash your manhood--now, before you make any rash decisions you'll spend a lifetime trying to rectify. 

Just my way of helping.

[horse]

Benn

If you have the HTPC down to 500 bucks all in and you are going to plug it into a 4k 1080P projector with a 130" screen and sit close,
I'd be suprised the video quality will be much to look at.

I don't have an big screen, but I've a friend who has a very nice custom built system (No Farraris in the drive but a 110" screen, SDI connected projector and out board processor) and we plugged in a various PC's (DVI, component - whatever) and the image was horrible on the lower end cards. On the 20" flat panel it was fine. We where only using 720P at the time.

And yes the high end audiophiles will prefer analogue and tube amps and not have a DAC or transister within 20 feet of the system as it affects the sound.

[benn600]

I have a tough time believing that.  The problem is that DVI or HDMI is simply a digital signal.  How can a pixel not look exactly as it is supposed to?

With insufficient power (graphics card), you will get low frame rates but I don't really think there is any such degradation with a digital interface?!  With a very cheap sound card I got, the analog is not great but the digital works perfectly fine!  It's just passing the 0's and 1's along.

Obviously the key is to have enough video memory to hold 1920x1080 pixels.  If you were running at 800x600 or something lower than 1080p, yes, it would not look very good!  But you probably just need more video ram in that case.

[horse]

Benn, do some research before you spend the money. Don't believe the sales pitch about speeds and feeds.
Just because something can send a 1920x1080xwhatever_color_depth bitstream, does not mean they all look the same when displaying movies.
In addition Faroudja and SiliconOptix would be out of business as the bitstreams would already be perfect.

Check out avsforums or any other good forum that deals with video. I can only tell you what I see and read.

If you don't start with a good source, no matter how much you spend on speakers or projectors, it will only sound and look good on paper.
I'm not suggesting you spend a fortune on equipment, just spend it in the right places.

For starters the source format of your content is MPEG 2 (Standard DVD's on your server) at 720 x 480 - First it needs to be decoded, not all decoders are created equal and then that needs to be upscaled to 1080P, not a simple process if you want it to look good. Then you've got the different frame rates to handle - start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

Yes digital is digital, but how you get from the digital DVD image on your server to a 1080P bitstream on that HDMI cable to the projector involves a heap of technology, knowledge and patents.

If all you care about is the specifications (1080P and 130") you will miss the real reason for listening to music and watching movies - it is all about the experience! If a few beers adds more to the experience than a rack full of technology, then get some coolers. I'll go watch a movie at jmones any time with a beer close at hand :-)

[jmone]

I'll go watch a movie at jmones any time with a beer close at hand :-)

Come on over - but I better provide the Beer as the one in your hand will be warm by the time you get to Sydney!

[benn600]

Now on the refrigerators in arms reach.  How many discrete refrigerators are you goin' for?  5.1?  I'd say you need 7.2.  Those deep freezers provide the ever important foundation of ice cold ice.

[jgreen]

Far be it for me to wander back to the original topic, but horse makes a REALLY good point about the display quality of the video--in particular, the analog element:  luma or "brightness", and contrast.  The short answer is that large projected displays--large for a home theater, teeny for a movie theater--have nowhere near the brightness or contrast of a theatrical display, or even a computer monitor.  And the current state-of-the-art in monitors--what, ~100 inches?--still isn't big enough to feed most people's idea of a home theater.

So:  Make sure you've viewed the projector you're planning to buy in action, make sure you like what you see.  A few years back I viewed an early version of the Texas Instruments laser chip that has made home theater projectors so much "better".  I was a bit underwhelmed.  Everything in the picture close to white was a beige fog, and the contrast range was about 60% of what you'd see on your TV.  There are newer versions out, and I'm sure they're much better, but there's a limit to how hot a bulb you're going to get in a consumer projector.

As for the Faroudja box, horse is right, it's really good at what it does.  But it doesn't own the process, in spite of having invented it.  I think you can save money here that will pay for a decent supply of beer. 

Remember, we're born with two hands, and yet we persist in drinking one beer at a time.     

[benn600]

My most recent fad interest is the Mitsubishi HC5000.  I read two reviews and they couldn't stop praising it.  Also, it is the one they were using for their display at the home theater place I visited.  Plus, it's only (lol) $4,000.  I think our upper limit will probably be $5,000 for the video.  For a screen, we may use our current one.  Since it will be widescreen, the inch count must be greater to get sufficient area for our satisfaction.  Our screen right now is huge.

We are thinking 130" might cut it.  But it still might need to be a bit larger.  We like it close to floor to ceiling so we are engulfed in the picture--forget the formula for what size the screen "should" be.

We're willing to sacrifice some brightness--plus, one of the reviews said it's a very bright projector anyway so we would be better off dimming it.  And we'll run in eco mode--which goes from 2K to 5K hours!  Big jump!

If I start breaking things down to estimate final costs, that is:
Projector, $4,000
Paradigm Studio 100 system, $8,000 (variable depending on 7.1 or 5.1 and discounts available)
Receiver, $2,000
HTPC, $400

Do we need to start with an HD or Blu-Ray player?  I know a lot of people who have bought Blu-Ray and personally prefer it.  I should lookup prices.
And do we need a wireless remote with IR blasters and IR lighting with a few different circuits (main, wall, accent)?

Part of the pricing problem is that some of this stuff gets added into the new home blue prints so even though we might spend $15,000 on equipment, a lot might go into the room features as well!  It could easily reach $25,000!  Yikes!

[jgreen]

--As soon as BDR/HD-DVD have something to offer other than a new layer of DRM, yeah, go buy one.  BTW, they're $500 now, and buggy, soon they'll be $50 and work better.  BBTW, the very first BDR pressings were uprezzed NTSC and looked awful.

--"Eco" mode means the bulb isn't being driven as hard, which is why it would last so much longer (also, it's failure curve will be more prolonged).  If the bulb's not being driven as hard, your whites won't be as white--kinda like forgetting the color-safe bleach in the washer.

--Just for giggles, go back to the video store selling the projector, and bring along your laptop.  You also want to bring a DVD along, something you enjoy.  Also, have a ripped (native-no dvix) version of the same DVD on your laptop.   Have them play the DVD on the projector, and do the same on your laptop.  Which picture do you like better?

[benn600]

Good suggestion.  I know that playing movies through a computer can be problematic because it doesn't provide upscaling that a simple, cheap DVD player can.  But why doesn't it?  Can't some code be written that will provide upscaling on a standard CPU?  It's dealing with 720x480 video content and outputting to 1920x1080 so some software could help upscale it.

The projector I'm looking at has very good upscaling.  However, wouldn't the PC have to change the resolution to 720x480 for the projector's processing to kick in?  If it's getting a 1080p signal it shouldn't mess with it too much, right?

[horse]

Nathan, I may have been closer than you expected and the beer never gets a chance to get warm :-) . My company has an event in Brisbane this week, so I might have been within a short flight. :-) I couldn't make it due to commitments here in the US. I was there a few years back and I enjoyed it a great deal. Keep the beer cold for next time, or if you ever get to the west coast I'll keep some imported British Beer within easy reach.

[newsposter]

Can't some code be written that will........

Benn, you have no idea how many times a day I hear that from people who are new to some topic or another.

After they start researching the topic and become as familiar with the guts of a process as they are with shiny brochures, the comments stop.

[benn600]

lol.  You don't think the hardware video processing solutions have software on them?  It exists on dedicated hardware.  It's possible.  There are a lot of smart people who specialize in video codecs and processing.  Who made the Blend, Bob, X deinterlacers?