1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Allocating a limited budget - screen vs sound

Discussion in 'Home Theater Projects' started by Joshua F, Apr 19, 2005.

  1. Joshua F

    Joshua F Auditioning

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've finally decided to set aside some funds for a serious (to me at least) home theatre.

    My question is this - should I sacrifice screen size so I can afford a better sound system?

    I'm in the position of choosing between a 52 inch or 62 inch Toshiba DLP TV - the ones with the HD2+ chip.

    Where I live (NZ), the 62 inch model is 33% more expensive than the 52 inch model - NZ$6000 for the 52 inch, NZ$8000 for the 62 inch.

    My total budget is around 10k, maximum.

    If I go with the 52 inch, I can afford a decent (Northridge) JBL sound system, and a good receiver.

    If I go with the 62 inch, I can really only afford a Pioneer/Wharfedale sound system.

    What would you do - bigger screen or better sound? Any comments on the Toshiba DLP TV also much appreciated.
     
  2. ChadLB

    ChadLB Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well say you go with the 62 inch that leaves you $4,000 for the Receiver, speakers, Sub, DVD player, and cables. You would need to decide how much you want to spend on each of these.
    Let's say $3-500 on a DVD player.
    $1,000 on a receiver.
    $800 on a sub.
    $2,000 for speakers/cables.

    This can get you some nice stuff.
    Here is an example:
    Denon 2910 $558
    HK 635 $700
    SVS PB12-ISD $599
    Axiom Epic 60 without sub $1600


    Total $3457 though the above doesn't include shipping costs or the wires.....

    Chad
     
  3. Bryce_H

    Bryce_H Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have heard that sound has a larger impact on a movie experience than picture. Not scientifically verified, but I tend to believe it.
     
  4. DavidVT

    DavidVT Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chad,

    Your assumption on the size vs cash remaining is incorrect [​IMG]

    Going with the 52" would allocate 4K, and be possible for the items you suggested (nice choices BTW)

    also, since he is from NZ, I honstly do not know if the prices or items you gave would fit the remainder of his budget via the currancy of his country

    Bryce, your statement is correct.... Just turn off the sound while watching a movie. No impact, no immersion, no nothing!
     
  5. ChadLB

    ChadLB Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oops...thanks for the correction and I forgot about currenty exchange rate..
     
  6. Ron-P

    Ron-P Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    6,285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Ron

    I disagree, I went from a 46" RPTV to an 85" FP and I will say the bigger picture has the larger impact.

    First question, have you considered a front projector. You can get a very nice DLP or LCD for $3k or less. You can DIY your screen and have plenty of cash left for the sound ($6k if not more). If it's a "serious" home theater, you should consider a front projector...seriously. A large front projected image puts the theater in home theater.

    If you must buy a TV, go with the larger. Then, buy yourself a good sub and receiver, what ever is left use on the other 5 speakers. You can upgrade those other 5 for much less then upgrading to a larger TV.
     
  7. Steve Rabbit

    Steve Rabbit Agent

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    skimp on the speakers, its really easy to find mid-fi speakers for an entry level budget. how easy is it to find a large TV that isnt grainy and choppy for a limited budget?

    some options are dayton 8's
    http://www.wadsnet.com/~dtenney/dayton_8MTM.htm

    some sigma horns:
    http://www.madisound.com/fostex.html

    speakerbuilder towers:
    http://www.speakerbuilder.net/web_files/users.htm

    parts express towers (check out the veritas, impressive looking!)
    http://www.partsexpress.com/projects...homeaudio.html

    these towers range from about $160 in parts to $3000+ (unlinked madisound kits) so you know you can find something within a budget!

    actually, you can even go for a low volume version using $40 fostex full range drivers, if you prefer not to use the sigma series drivers.

    also check out www.adireaudio.com. they used to make an HE12.1 tower, but I'd bet the 10.1 is still impressive. you can email dan to see if he has any left. 100 dB of output with just over 3 watts is DARN impressive for a tower!
     
  8. Steve Rabbit

    Steve Rabbit Agent

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    I plan to run dayton 8's for my home theater personally. they cost about $80 in parts (without cabinets) so they are cheap enough for me to build three for the stage, they play low enough for me not to need a subwoofer, and can take enough power to blow me away at high volumes. all I need ot match up to a projector!

    and at 4 cubes a tower, they are impressive "looking" enough (looking like a monster is half the job!) to match up to a massive TV.

    but I like the veritas too, or the idea of running a pair of fostex full range horns, or the HE 12.1 ported, or I suppose the HE10.1, etc, etc, etc....
     
  9. Parker Clack

    Parker Clack Schizophrenic Man
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    12,222
    Likes Received:
    57
    Location:
    Kansas City, MO
    Real Name:
    Parker
    Joshua:

    I second what Ron said. If you have the realestate get a front projection system. You can get a great front projector with screen for about $3K and that would leave you with plenty to get a new audio system with.

    A member of the forum that lives in Australia by the username of Nick.H has a very nice setup with a huge screen. Click here to see some pictures of his setup. It might give you some ideas.

    I am in the camp that sound and picture are a 50/50 split on importance of overall impact.

    Parker
     
  10. Dave>h

    Dave>h Second Unit

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    6
    HI,

    Speaking from expereince, I spent a lot of time effort and money tweaking my sound system and had a relatively small tv 27". Once I had the sound system where I wanted it, I went out and bought a big TV - Samsung DLP 61".

    I get way more compliments and "ooh" and "ahh" from the TV than I ever did for the sound system - most people are more visually stimulated than aurally stimulated is my guess or people appreciate sight more than sound.

    However, for me, the sound was always the most important part of the experience. Now they come to my place and watch movies and wish they had something like it at home and leave complimenting the TV. But without wicked sound, the experience would not be as good.

    Is it 50/50 as someone mentioned - not sure. I think it depends on the person. I love sound and love listening to music, so for me the stereo and speakers were WAY more important than the TV. If, however, you are planning on watching tv and movies exclusively and aren't using it as your stereo as well (or you don't listen to much music) then maybe the picture is more important.

    I think it is personal preference but I guarantee you will get way more compliments on the TV than you will ever get on the stereo.

    Dave
     

Share This Page