Home Theater...its Not That Hard!!!

**mantis** · 07-28-2002 12:19 PM

Check it out,
all you need for home theater is of the follows.

1)5 channels of EQUAL AND SAME BRAND amps

2)MATCHING preamp(a surround receiver would replace steps one and 2)

3)5 of the SAME brand speakers from the SAME line...all MATCHING.

4)a subwoofer.

5)MATCHING front 3 wire ,better if all wire is the same length.Good quality rear wire if equal length even better.All nessary interconnects to wire it up.

6)A source or sources.

7)a monitor of some sort.

8)A room to put all this in

9)Surge protection(at least enough outlets to plug everything into).

10)a place to sit,something to drink and snack on and away you go.And maybe someone to cuttle up with.

ANY ARGUEMENTS?????love to talk about it.

**HBombToo** · 07-28-2002 12:40 PM

I especially agree with #10!!! My wife is who I pick!

**jackpete** · 07-28-2002 05:06 PM

I hope installation is as simple as you say. I intend to install such a system in the near future. I plan to have all Polk speakers including in-wall surround and in-wall front speakers. I hope this works!

I have a Sony DVD player and will acquire a Sony A/V Receiver (STR-SL7) to match the DVD player.

**mantis** · 07-28-2002 07:23 PM

jackpete,
No problem...if you get fed up with install, just drop by your local Tweeter store and arange an opointment with them for a Install.

We Install anybodies gear.You'll get great service and some advice on where to place everything.

**danger boy** · 07-28-2002 07:29 PM

you forgot a kick ass DTS dvd. ha ha ha

**TroyD** · 07-28-2002 09:36 PM

Actually, I would argue that the HT should be defined on an individual basis. For some, A TV / VCR and maybe a 2ch receiver and a pair of speakers work well for them. Moreover, if it does, than who is anyone else to tell them different.

To me, it's all about enjoyment. If it is yours and you dig it, then go with it.

BDT

**mantis** · 07-28-2002 11:07 PM

No man,
then you wouldn't have Home Theater.You'd have your own enjoyed entertainment system.
2 channel speaker layout is not Home Theater......I knew you would come on this post with some left field stuff like that.

Since you understand 2 channel better then HT.......let me ask you this.....
If you have a mono clock radio and are happy with the sound quality for your music on this mono clock radio...is that a 2 channel stereo rig?

Come on Troy are you just trying to be silly????

**F1nut** · 07-29-2002 12:18 AM

mantis,
I've got to agree with the BDT on this one. Where is it stated that HT has to include a center channel, rear surrounds and a sub? I understand that if one wants to get the most out of a 5.1-7.1 DVD track then one would need all the equipment, but personally I don't like feeling as though I'm in the middle of a movie set anymore than I like feeling like I'm in the middle of a stage. A clock radio is as artificial as surround sound....IMHO!

**Audioreality** · 07-29-2002 12:58 AM

You've got to be kidding.
The concept of "home theater" is to try as closely as possible to put you in the action, just like the movie theaters.
Would you shell out the bucks to see a movie if it didn't immerse you in sound? Doubtfully.
It's a brave new world.
Full of cool new technology.
You should give it another chance.
It can be very hard to set up a proper theater in any given room within a residence. Many factors involving the rooms' characteristics come into play when implementing a home theater. You can't just expect to slap a system together using manufactures specs. and acheive a proper sound. It doesn't nessisarily work that way. So many people are turned of to HT simply for the fact they haven't heard one properly set up in a tuned room.
All of the people who have heard my HT claim it to better than the theaters. I believe it is.
If your happy with the sound of your system, then cool, go with it.
I personally run a 7.2 HT in a 10 x 15ft room.
It not only puts me there, I get lost in the sound.
But, to each their own.
I'm pushing for T.Holmin's 10.2 surround.
It should be here in the next few years after they have exhausted the marketing on the current available formats.
Above all enjoy you system.

**F1nut** · 07-29-2002 02:01 AM

Originally posted by Audioreality
You've got to be kidding.
The concept of "home theater" is to try as closely as possible to put you in the action, just like the movie theaters.
Would you shell out the bucks to see a movie if it didn't immerse you in sound? Doubtfully.

I understand the concept, it's just not real. I've been going to the movies for along time (before surround sound) and the sound is not the important aspect, it's the quality of the movie, the story line and the acting. That is what one should be immersed in. A "great sound track" will not make a bad movie into a good movie. I have never left a movie thinking, boy that surround sound really made that movie!!!

While I am open minded, new technology does not necessarily make it better!

**RuSsMaN** · 07-29-2002 07:05 AM

Agreed F1 and BDT.

**mantis** · 07-29-2002 07:20 AM

Listen up guys,

you need to learn the term HOME THEATER.

Remember awhile ago we talked about term tossing????This post is no different.

Enter the term and enter the understanding.

F1nut,
you opnion of how Home Theater sounds is noted.You also must be in your forties if youv'e been to the movies without surround sound.There has been surround sound in the theater's since as far back as I can remember.I'm 32.
Can you go there about this no surround sound in the theater and tell me the last movie you watched like this there?
Thats kind of cool if you got to experience movies way back then,Id like to hear your thoughts.

Audioreality,
good post and your points are very good.Welcome to the forum.

Russman,
thats it??????you just agree with your boy with no reason?
I thought you would have gone into some deeper detail here.

Just remember guys...Home Theater in it's simplest form is of follows...............

A TV
A video source.
A surround procesor(dolby surround)
3 channels of info...left...right...surround
3 to 4 speakers(if you wanted to argue only one rear it could be somewhat valued as it's only a matrixed mono anyway.

Whats not being understood here about home theater TroyD,Russman and Fnut??????????????

Todays speed is 7.1(6.1)........you can't do that with a stereo system.Just like you can't have stereo out of a mono clock radio

**joe logston** · 07-29-2002 07:57 AM

mantis, one thing the most important one, you forgot on your list. # 11 good movie, or music. that what it is all about.

**hoosier21** · 07-29-2002 08:09 AM

ZzzZzz

**TroyD** · 07-29-2002 09:06 AM

.....and this definition of HT would be found where?

Again, I respectfully reserve the right to disagree. HT can be as simple or as complicated as one chooses to make it and in the end, if you are happy with it, that is ALL that matters.

As far as the rest of it, if you are trying to bait me in to a pissing match, I'd rather not, thanks. The clock radio analogy is flawed obviously because there aren't 2 channels, duh. HT is different, it's subjective. Read the opening paragraph in the Polk HT guide, it says the essentially what I have said.

We disagree, enough said, let's move on.

BDT

**TroyD** · 07-29-2002 12:02 PM

I dunno, I'm going to throw this out there......

When I watch/listen to a movie, the sound is just gravy to be honest. I've never based my opinion of a movie on the soundtrack. I've always said that a crappy movie is a crappy movie and all the sound in the world doesn't make a difference.

Having said that, I don't expect any theater experience (IMAX, HT or the local Cineplex) to accurately recreate a particular sound experience. For example, my office is about 20 yards from the flightline. I listen to airplanes start, taxi, takeoff, land etc etc...every day. I've never experienced a sequence in a theater that made me say, 'WOW that was like the real thing'.

Maybe I am off base in my thinking here and this is quite possibly why I don't have the discerning standards for HT sound as others do. I'm not saying that I am right, but it is my opinion.

BDT

**burdette** · 07-29-2002 12:22 PM

I think each of us has our particular interest (or 2) that we take to the technological extreme. When I was in high school, I invested in a good stereo rather than my first beater car, because I was interested in and cared about audio. Other people were happy listening to a compact stereo and would never have thought to drop much money on audio. I spent more on my first 3-head, dual capstan cassette deck than most people spent on their entire sound system ("Dual what?")

Some guys spent a **** load on their car, painting it, getting this or that add-on, chrome this, fat tires.. for me it was a waste of money (so I didn't do it).

There are people who wouldn't even consider a home wood shop to be a "real" shop unless it sported a $4000 table saw and full vacuum system and $500 saw blades and this and that and the other thing. For others of us, our interest in wood shop, while real, just doesn't go that far. The technological extremists would look at my shop and laugh and mock me.. but it works for me to the level of my needs and interest.

I don't think audio or "home theater" is any different. There are those out there who have the interest (and obviously the means) to always be cutting edge. They had a CD player when the things were still $2000. Guys bought the first THX equipment because it was THERE... guys bought Pro Logic when it came out because it was THE thing. You name it, there are those who want it and can afford it, and those who don't care in the least, and those (like me), who are definitely interested and love the technology, but who can't buy new equipment each year or spend the big bucks all the time. I *still* have a better audio/video system than just about anyone I know, yet I know there are readers of this forum who would laugh at and mock my setup.

When I was in college, we ripped out the headphone jack on a 13" black and white TV and wired the signal into a Yamaha receiver... whoowhee, home theater.. mono, bad signal, but better than it had been. When I first hooked a VCR into my receiver, it was better than it had been. When I upgraded speakers, it was better than it had been. I kept investing up to the point that either
1) it wasn't better than it had been (i.e. topped out on a good cassette deck way before I reached the price limit) or
2) I couldn't afford to spend more.

There are guys here who no doubt spent more on speaker wire than I spent on my new DD receiver. I spent more on my receiver than some people would drop for anything audio. At this point in my life, my system sounds great to me and serves its purpose and is better than it had been. It is home theater to me because that is what we use it for.

Godspeed to you guys who want and can afford the best stuff out there. I'd enjoy that shopping trip, too. But you can take your mocking and stuff it in your subwoofer box.

I've got an electrical engineering degree.. so.. what now, should we discuss at what point you're throwing your money away on more expensive wiring???

**HBombToo** · 07-29-2002 12:33 PM

Burdette, I tried to do a cost analysis post a few moths ago but it was burried.

Oh Well, there you have it....

**RuSsMaN** · 07-29-2002 01:38 PM

So you posted your thoughts on HT minimums, mine would be any Hi-fi source (vcr), a color monitor, I'd say go at least 25", a stereo receiver or amp, and 2 speakers....

I agreed with the other members, why must that ALWAYS get your feathers ruffled?

-Russ

**HBombToo** · 07-29-2002 02:13 PM

TroyD,

I'll never forget visiting a friend in Tague, check spelling, South Korea and the Black Bird fired up. Damn!!!!! I thought there was an earth quake. There is no way in hell for any soundsystem to recreate that. What a truely awsome experience that was and Amazing Aircraft. The US has some really kickass technology! Your lucky to be apart of it.

**jcaut** · 07-29-2002 02:17 PM

Mantis,

I'm not trying to argue on this, 'cause I see your point. I really do. I just think trying to define a generic term like "home theater" is silly.

I note drastic differences in your first "definition" of home theater, versus your second, a few posts up.

Now maybe if you qualify the term with something like a DOLBY DIGITAL 5.1 "home theater" or (you'll like this one) THX CERTIFIED home theater, THEN you might be able to define it. Otherwise, it's whatever you want it to be. At least that's the way I understand it. I hear a lot of people use the term "surround sound". What does that mean? My wife's aunt an uncle built a new house a few years ago and had it "wired" for surround sound. I was impressed until I found out that their definition of "surround sound" was basically an intercom with music capability and at least one speaker in every room. They're surrounded by sound, by golly.

Troy makes a good and very valid point about trying to produce live, accurate sound. You can try all you want, but you won't succeed. There's no way ANY sound system is going to accurately reproduce the sound of a jet taking off, an orchestra, rock concert, etc. Movies don't sound like the real thing, 'cause they're not the real thing. If it sounds close enough to draw you into the action, then that's all that counts. And sometimes, if the story is good, it doesn't take an impressive list of equipment to accomplish that.

That's it for me--
Jason

**TroyD** · 07-29-2002 03:02 PM

HBomb.....

Yeah, the U2 is something EVERYONE should hear. THAT is impressive. Only bad thing is those bastards used to take off in the middle of the night and you can hear that thing for miles.

BDT

**HBombToo** · 07-29-2002 03:22 PM

Over Memorial Day the damn Stealth Bomber flew right over my house and I thought I was going sheee-iiiit.... My little girl started crying and the wife was running around with the sony camcorder. "Funny and impressive Stuff". It could have only been 1K in the air and damn is that a big sucker! I would not want to be on the receiving end of that.

**scottvamp** · 07-29-2002 03:22 PM

All I know is that in my years in HT i have achieved what I wanted. I have better sound and video quality than any theater I have been in. Ht has way surpassed the movie theater and WILL continue. HD DVD is less than a year away and I can't what. 6.1 -- got'a love it. Music is also very enjoyable. I have landed.:D

**joe logston** · 07-29-2002 06:39 PM

that with me to scottvamp, im totaly happy with my system to,i think that the only stuff i mite get is a wide screen rear projection tv. and a malti-dvd viedio audio player, and mybe lsi-9 speakers, but if i dont its no big deal.

**Ron-P** · 07-29-2002 06:47 PM

HT is all about the movie, in it's OAR of course. That's it. I am just displaying that movie using the best technology I can afford.

Peace Out~:D

**mantis** · 07-29-2002 09:51 PM

FOR ALL ON THIS POST POSTING............................
What is it you don't understand about Home Theater??????????

Think about it.......
What is it?
If you read my first post then my second post of Home Theater.....One describes todays standards for home theater and the other was Dolby surround.

Why and where does defending your personal systems come into play?I never bashed commented on anyones system.

But the fact is,
If you have a 2 channel stereo wired up with a video source....IT'S NOT HOME THEATER.....PERIOD.
Call it what you want...old school, better fidelity for a vcr,good tv speakers ,but it's not a home theater system.

Simply put home theater audio is fronts and rear channels.
Today there are more channels of information......despite if they are REAL or not..........Is 2 channel REAL??????

Thats doesn't matter one bit.
I don't care you work in an office listening to things outside and realise your system can't make it sound real.........does yoiur 2 channel system sound exactly like the band is there in your room?????????Of course not......

What I don't understand is why this post has to get clowned like that.A clock radio is a clock radio no matter how good or bad it sounds........it still plays music right????If I was totally into my clock radio you would have ripped my system/radio apart.....PEOPLE!!!!!!

WHAT YOUR DOING IS NOT HOME THEATER.

**TroyD** · 07-29-2002 10:02 PM

Says who? Where is this HT standard printed?

Again, I say read the introduction to the Polk HT Handbook and it will say pretty much what we have been saying.

Christ, is it OK if someone doesn't agree with you?

BDT

**jcaut** · 07-29-2002 10:03 PM

The point was that the thread was "clowned" from the beginning. Trying to define home theater for us is silly. I really don't care how it's defined....

I just don't see the point. Were there people on here wondering if there system was a proper "home theater"? I wasn't aware of it, if there were. I think the topic of the thread was INTENDED stir things up, and I just don't get it.

But there's a lot of things I don't get....:p

**mantis** · 07-29-2002 10:49 PM

the real question is it ok for someone to dissagree with you?

Thread: Home Theater...its Not That Hard!!!

Thread Tools

Home Theater...its Not That Hard!!!

Installation of Home Theater

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions