Who here doesn't watch on "home theaters"? (1 Viewer)

[Yee-Ming]

I think Jeff at post #70 and Lew at #74 have put it very well.

I started watching DVDs off a DVD-ROM drive on my computer, with a 17" monitor and crappy computer speakers. I did try connecting the PC to my 29" flatscreen TV (4:3 though), but once the DVD bug had well and truly bitten, I soon "upgraded" to a Yamaha HTiB and was perfectly happy with it all.

I then got married, and to outfit the new place I decided to get a "proper" setup with a decent receiver, floorstanders and surround speakers, SVS sub etc. (And yes, this forum was invaluable in helping me with purchase decisions, especially the SVS, which was a "blind" purchase based on trust in the recommendations of this board -- glad I did it!) Same 29" TV though, until earlier this year when I finally upgraded that to a 43" flatpanel.

Technical discussions: me, I rarely "see" edge enhancement, maybe because my old 29" was "too small" -- but isn't that a "good" thing? One less thing to get worked up over And although theoretically I might be able to hear the niceties described in the discussions of audio tracks, I still have tin-ears, and as long as things sound crystal-clear and detailed, nicely balanced, plenty of oomph where appropriate, I couldn't care less if the DD track sounds a "tiny bit congested" compared to the DTS track. But if the movie/TV show is good and the extras are worthwhile, I'm there.

(Sorry, I don't mean to denigrate the hard -- and excellent -- work of our reviewers, just that in making DVD purchase decisions, PQ/SQ issues do not rank anywhere near as high as whether I liked the movie/TV show itself in the first place, or if a blind-purchase whether I'm interested enough in it; and then the quality of extras, which to me is a reasonably important factor. But this is purely personal, I know many HTFers rank PQ/SQ much more important than EQ, and I respect that.)

As long as you enjoy your DVDs, that's all that counts.

 

[Tony Whalen]

Pretty sure? I'm TOTALLY sure.

 

[Tony Whalen]

Pretty sure? I'm TOTALLY sure.

 

[Stephen_Ri]

Hey, I'm here to tell ya that money isn't really a huge issue with home theater. I've got a 27" zenith HDTV, cost just $500 and the thing delivers all the detail a DVD has to offer. I've even got it calibrated with DVE. I am very interested in things like edge enhancement or any other transfer problem, because such things are very annoying to me. I use an old Marantz receiver and a couple cheap but large stereo speakers. I sit 3-4 feet from the tv and become totally immersed in my "cinematic experience." All for under $600. I could do the same on a properly calibrated 27inch tube tv using, say, composite video. I don't think you're being resentful at all, but I do think this thread is a bit on the pointless and silly side. There. Now I've just made it longer.

 

[Stephen_Ri]

Hey, I'm here to tell ya that money isn't really a huge issue with home theater. I've got a 27" zenith HDTV, cost just $500 and the thing delivers all the detail a DVD has to offer. I've even got it calibrated with DVE. I am very interested in things like edge enhancement or any other transfer problem, because such things are very annoying to me. I use an old Marantz receiver and a couple cheap but large stereo speakers. I sit 3-4 feet from the tv and become totally immersed in my "cinematic experience." All for under $600. I could do the same on a properly calibrated 27inch tube tv using, say, composite video. I don't think you're being resentful at all, but I do think this thread is a bit on the pointless and silly side. There. Now I've just made it longer.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Andrew, my bedroom system consists of a Toshiba CZ27V51, a Denon AVR-1803, a Toshiba SD-2800 player, and the Acoustic Research HC6 speakers. And, yep, I enjoy the hell out of it -- sometimes more than my WEGA-based main system in the living room. (BTW, on the 27-inch Tosh, I do the "squeeze" from the service menu when I screen 16:9-encoded discs.)

 

[Jack Briggs]

Andrew, my bedroom system consists of a Toshiba CZ27V51, a Denon AVR-1803, a Toshiba SD-2800 player, and the Acoustic Research HC6 speakers. And, yep, I enjoy the hell out of it -- sometimes more than my WEGA-based main system in the living room. (BTW, on the 27-inch Tosh, I do the "squeeze" from the service menu when I screen 16:9-encoded discs.)

 

[MarkHastings]

As someone already mentioned, the "Wal-Mart" and "J6P" bashing is more in frustration over studios who only try to satisfy this group by releasing MAR only DVD's. Sometimes the name calling gets out of hand, but a lot of it is more out of "passion" than anything else. Pro-OAR people don't like when the Pro-MAR influence ruins a title they want.

The term started out as "the ignorant consumer", but people immediately assume the term is a slam, meaning, to be ignorant is a bad thing. When in reality it's not. It means "Lacking education or knowledge" - As I said before, it's tough for Pro-OAR people when people with the lack of knowledge about a product (i.e. ignorant people) have such a strong influence on the DVD market. This frustration has led to the J6P and Wal-Mart terms we all use. Sure, it's a generalization, but any term would be a generalization. What other term can we use to describe the aforementioned group?

As far as the HT is concerned, it's not the size of the HT, it's the passion you put into it. Of course there are discussions where a person with a 90" TV may notice "bad" pixelization over someone who owns a 20" tv, but that's just the nature of the technology. It doesn't mean that they are better or more knowledgeable than you, it just means they have the ability to see it better. As long as they don't put you down, what's the big deal?

You can look at this from the other side as well. If I noticed bad compression on a 90" tv, why should I be belittled by someone saying something like "you're being silly by discussing a minute detail that no one can see"?

 

[MarkHastings]

As someone already mentioned, the "Wal-Mart" and "J6P" bashing is more in frustration over studios who only try to satisfy this group by releasing MAR only DVD's. Sometimes the name calling gets out of hand, but a lot of it is more out of "passion" than anything else. Pro-OAR people don't like when the Pro-MAR influence ruins a title they want.

The term started out as "the ignorant consumer", but people immediately assume the term is a slam, meaning, to be ignorant is a bad thing. When in reality it's not. It means "Lacking education or knowledge" - As I said before, it's tough for Pro-OAR people when people with the lack of knowledge about a product (i.e. ignorant people) have such a strong influence on the DVD market. This frustration has led to the J6P and Wal-Mart terms we all use. Sure, it's a generalization, but any term would be a generalization. What other term can we use to describe the aforementioned group?

As far as the HT is concerned, it's not the size of the HT, it's the passion you put into it. Of course there are discussions where a person with a 90" TV may notice "bad" pixelization over someone who owns a 20" tv, but that's just the nature of the technology. It doesn't mean that they are better or more knowledgeable than you, it just means they have the ability to see it better. As long as they don't put you down, what's the big deal?

You can look at this from the other side as well. If I noticed bad compression on a 90" tv, why should I be belittled by someone saying something like "you're being silly by discussing a minute detail that no one can see"?

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Be very HAPPY that the 'snobs' here at HTF see defects on DVD's, that your system does not expose. That elitist knowledge, can save YOU money. Some day, you may upgrade your HT. How upsetting would it be, to find out ALL those DVD that looked OK, are now showing their true flaws?!?!?!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Be very HAPPY that the 'snobs' here at HTF see defects on DVD's, that your system does not expose. That elitist knowledge, can save YOU money. Some day, you may upgrade your HT. How upsetting would it be, to find out ALL those DVD that looked OK, are now showing their true flaws?!?!?!

 

[Seth Paxton]

As a voice of slight contradiction to several of my HTF friends who I know well and respect a lot, there is SOMETHING to the idea of defining the term "home theater" in terms of equipment.

Think of it like this. A genetic disease affects people of a certain race, could be sickle cell and blacks or any number of similar situations. A doctor or researcher trying to define a person as "black" is not doing so to insult them, nor to diminish their importance.

Quite the opposite, it is simply laying out groundwork to say "when I say this I mean these factors, and these factors are chosen because they have relevance to the subject". The researcher wants to give the person importance, either as data for one or another category with the goal of solving a problem.


So it is with HT definitions. For reviews its very important that a person have a "solid" setup well-off the bottom end of things. You need to have equipment that can accurately discover any issues.

If you are reading such a review but do not have such a system, then you can take that into account, ie "hey, I'll never notice that". But if you have a mono TV and say the sound is great, only for some 5.1 person to buy the disc and find out the channels were mis-encoded, then you haven't really done your job as a reviewer.



And then on the personal side of things, it's still important that we define what makes HT DIFFERENT from TV. After all, I saw Godzilla MOVIES in my HOME back in 1975.

Do we really think that was "home theater"? Generally, no. We see new technologies as being part of the area of interest called "home theater".

Look, we still discuss MOVIES and their content in a section. We still discuss DVD artwork, MUSIC, and even AFTER HOURS stuff. Anyone at HTF that excludes you from discussions because of your setup is just being a prick and doesn't belong here.


But if I say "well, I think a surround encoder should be a minimal part of an HT system" it has NOTHING to do with belittling you and everything to do with defining the hobby.

And finally, let's not confuse FILM enthusiast with HOME THEATER enthusiast. HTF has both of these types, some are both at the same time, others are one or the other. Hopefully HT people that don't appreciate film will come to do so VIA their HT experiences, and usually a film buff has a goal to have the best possible system that works within their lifestyle.

It's silly to say "I like films on my watchman, so I have an HT" just to validate your film interest, and it makes any HT goals and discussions kinda pointless if "everything counts".


If you are in a car club you don't expect a person to show up on a horse and say "hey, I ride it around, it goes 20 mph, it's my car". Doesn't mean you hate horses, hate the guy or want to exclude him. Heck ride the horse to every meet, talk cars with people, etc, but don't try to convince them that your horse is a car and that their talk of carbs or high-octane fuel is elitist snobbery.

IMO, that speaks of a chip on the shoulder then.


It's been my experience that most HT nuts love to SHARE their systems with others. Just take Scooterpalooza as one example. People know that everyone is different ages and many of the "high-end" guys around HTF sure as hell aren't 17. Many of us are well past 30, 40, and so on, so of course we have more resources available to us.

 

[Seth Paxton]

As a voice of slight contradiction to several of my HTF friends who I know well and respect a lot, there is SOMETHING to the idea of defining the term "home theater" in terms of equipment.

Think of it like this. A genetic disease affects people of a certain race, could be sickle cell and blacks or any number of similar situations. A doctor or researcher trying to define a person as "black" is not doing so to insult them, nor to diminish their importance.

Quite the opposite, it is simply laying out groundwork to say "when I say this I mean these factors, and these factors are chosen because they have relevance to the subject". The researcher wants to give the person importance, either as data for one or another category with the goal of solving a problem.


So it is with HT definitions. For reviews its very important that a person have a "solid" setup well-off the bottom end of things. You need to have equipment that can accurately discover any issues.

If you are reading such a review but do not have such a system, then you can take that into account, ie "hey, I'll never notice that". But if you have a mono TV and say the sound is great, only for some 5.1 person to buy the disc and find out the channels were mis-encoded, then you haven't really done your job as a reviewer.



And then on the personal side of things, it's still important that we define what makes HT DIFFERENT from TV. After all, I saw Godzilla MOVIES in my HOME back in 1975.

Do we really think that was "home theater"? Generally, no. We see new technologies as being part of the area of interest called "home theater".

Look, we still discuss MOVIES and their content in a section. We still discuss DVD artwork, MUSIC, and even AFTER HOURS stuff. Anyone at HTF that excludes you from discussions because of your setup is just being a prick and doesn't belong here.


But if I say "well, I think a surround encoder should be a minimal part of an HT system" it has NOTHING to do with belittling you and everything to do with defining the hobby.

And finally, let's not confuse FILM enthusiast with HOME THEATER enthusiast. HTF has both of these types, some are both at the same time, others are one or the other. Hopefully HT people that don't appreciate film will come to do so VIA their HT experiences, and usually a film buff has a goal to have the best possible system that works within their lifestyle.

It's silly to say "I like films on my watchman, so I have an HT" just to validate your film interest, and it makes any HT goals and discussions kinda pointless if "everything counts".


If you are in a car club you don't expect a person to show up on a horse and say "hey, I ride it around, it goes 20 mph, it's my car". Doesn't mean you hate horses, hate the guy or want to exclude him. Heck ride the horse to every meet, talk cars with people, etc, but don't try to convince them that your horse is a car and that their talk of carbs or high-octane fuel is elitist snobbery.

IMO, that speaks of a chip on the shoulder then.


It's been my experience that most HT nuts love to SHARE their systems with others. Just take Scooterpalooza as one example. People know that everyone is different ages and many of the "high-end" guys around HTF sure as hell aren't 17. Many of us are well past 30, 40, and so on, so of course we have more resources available to us.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

YIKES!!!
I do believe 'that' is what the thread starter was afraid of.
I am ALL-INCLUSIVE in 'our' hobby. My brother's HT, is a $200 Cosco HTiaB. With a 12 year old 17" TV. When he wish's too borrow DVD's to enjoy on his system, am I supposed to say; NO! You do not have a HT.
The MORE people that are into HT, the better for ALL!
No matter where one might start off at.

Also, the thread starter states;
"Who here doesn't watch on "HT"?"
So, I'll include him in HT, even if he doesn't include himself!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

YIKES!!!
I do believe 'that' is what the thread starter was afraid of.
I am ALL-INCLUSIVE in 'our' hobby. My brother's HT, is a $200 Cosco HTiaB. With a 12 year old 17" TV. When he wish's too borrow DVD's to enjoy on his system, am I supposed to say; NO! You do not have a HT.
The MORE people that are into HT, the better for ALL!
No matter where one might start off at.

Also, the thread starter states;
"Who here doesn't watch on "HT"?"
So, I'll include him in HT, even if he doesn't include himself!

 

[Bryan X]

I have to agree with Seth.


Re-read Seth's post. That's not what he's saying at all.

He's saying you can enjoy watching movies on anything you wish, but we shouldn't call anything and everything a 'Home Theater'.

'Home Theater' encompasses a wide range of set-ups, but just because you have a TV doesn't mean you have HT. You need more than just a TV to have a 'Home Theater'. If you think all that's needed is a TV for home theater, then I suppose your Grandparents had HT back in the '50s.


home theater

n.

A system of sophisticated electronic equipment for the presentation of theater-quality images and sound in the home.

The American Heritage Dictionary

One of the key words here being 'system' - A group of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent elements forming a complex whole.

 

[Bryan X]

I have to agree with Seth.


Re-read Seth's post. That's not what he's saying at all.

He's saying you can enjoy watching movies on anything you wish, but we shouldn't call anything and everything a 'Home Theater'.

'Home Theater' encompasses a wide range of set-ups, but just because you have a TV doesn't mean you have HT. You need more than just a TV to have a 'Home Theater'. If you think all that's needed is a TV for home theater, then I suppose your Grandparents had HT back in the '50s.


home theater

n.

A system of sophisticated electronic equipment for the presentation of theater-quality images and sound in the home.

The American Heritage Dictionary

One of the key words here being 'system' - A group of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent elements forming a complex whole.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Bryan X posts;
Bryan X, please re-read Seth's post.

"sophisticated"

Are you in any way shape or form suggesting that any TV, DVD, reciever, speaker, or even VCR, is NOT "sophisticated" electronic equipment???

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Bryan X posts;
Bryan X, please re-read Seth's post.

"sophisticated"

Are you in any way shape or form suggesting that any TV, DVD, reciever, speaker, or even VCR, is NOT "sophisticated" electronic equipment???

 

[Bryan X]

Yes, a TV, DVD, Receiver, etc. IS sophisticated electronic equipment.

But the definition says an HT is a 'SYSTEM of sophisticated electronic equipment'. NOT a PIECE of sophisticated electronic equipment.