Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

Will Eight Inches Make a Difference?

9K views 73 replies 10 participants last post by  gdstupak 
#1 ·
We (that is, the wife and I) have been contemplating upsizing the display in our main living room/home theater from a 50" rear projection to something bigger given our seating distance (the display comes from a previous apartment install in which we were around eight or so feet away from the screen; we are now 13 feet from the same screen in our new house) but the problem is, it must be a screen that fits within the limits of the wall unit/entertainment center we have now because it was a rather big investment and we're not getting rid of it.

The wall unit can hold, at maximum, a 58-inch screen (give or take) so my question is...will the eight inches make a visible impact difference between what we see now on the 50-inch? Will the impact for film watching (the majority of what this room is used for) definitely be increased even though it's merely an eight-inch increase in screen size? I've heard both arguments regarding this, and just wanted to hear from some fellow Shacksters and get some of your opinions...

Thanks! :T
 
#3 ·
Thank you very much for the reply, Mike. You are making me feel better about this possible upgrade!

My 50" Sony, a rear projection SXRD, is a native 1080p set. Any incoming 1080p signals (like from a BD player) are displayed as-is, while any lower resolutions are automatically upconverted to 1080p (this is what the TV is supposedly doing when fed a 1080i cable signal from our high def cable box)...

Can you give me a bit more detail as to why you feel the jump to this bigger size will be significant? Will the impact of films be greater and a bit more "film-like" at the bigger size? As for the screen type, we would most likely be looking at a plasma or LCD at the 58" size...I happen to love the look of Sony's MotionFlow refresh feature which makes film material look like surreal, floaty video -- you know, the "Soap Opera Look." :T
 
#4 ·
The SXRD is probably 4 or 5 years old, all RP TVs loose their brightness with use. A new LCD will have a much better picture. As for screen size, go to a store and compare a 50 to a 58 and see if the difference in screen size is significant enough for you. I have compared them and find a big difference.
 
#6 ·
The SXRD is probably 4 or 5 years old, all RP TVs loose their brightness with use. A new LCD will have a much better picture.
Yes, I understand this; of course, a new bulb would rectify the brightness situation, but we haven't required one yet...

Still, the vividness/brightness issue really isn't the problem with the set; it's the size, which I will address below...

As for screen size, go to a store and compare a 50 to a 58 and see if the difference in screen size is significant enough for you. I have compared them and find a big difference.
Have you compared them in your own viewing environment at home, or in a store? It's hard to judge the differences in a store with a plethora of sets all around you...

But I am more interested in your sentiments regarding the larger screen making a "big difference;" can you give me some more insight here, as I think this is touching on more of what I wanted to know? Did the impact of viewed material just seem more dramatic and tactile? Did the image appear "larger" and more "in your face" and theatrical on the bigger screen?
 
#7 ·
Thank you for your opinion here; in what way do you think the jump in eight inches would be significant? Can you give me some more insight, lcaillo?
 
#9 ·
It is enough bigger to result in a significantly better viewing experience, IME.
Should I get a more "immersive" or "cinematic" experience with widescreen films/media?

At that distance 50" is somewhat small, in my opinion.
Indeed; hence the reason we were considering upsizing the display...

It's funny -- depending on the type of film being viewed, or the aspect ratio it's exhibited in, the experience is satisfactory with dim to no lighting on this SXRD screen...for example, if the film is in a 1.78:1 or 1.85:1 ratio, or a full screen transfer, the image fills the screen completely and during bright sequences, the experience is, as I said, satisfactory. If we're watching something in a 2.35: or 2.40:1 ratio with letterboxing, the image looks much more "squished" and dim -- especially during very dark sequences where the image gets so small, in my view, that it's difficult to even make out what's going on during the scene...
 
#11 ·
Thanks, Bambino!

Do you think that even at 13 feet the eight inch difference will be significant?
 
#13 ·
Thanks for your input again regarding your feelings on the jump to a 58" screen -- can you tell me a bit more about why you feel this would be a substantial improvement over the 50?
 
#15 ·
My suggestion would be to go take a look at some at the store and the differance between the two will speak for themselves.
Well, in a store it wouldn't be a good comparison (I've tried this already) because of all the walls of sets surrounding you; I need to ascertain if the eight-inch jump will be significant in my own viewing space, as directly compared to the 50...:bigsmile:
 
#16 ·
I hear what your saying but the only advice i can give has been allready. I remember years ago when i use to look at the Crutchfield catalog they use to have a chart for size and viewing distance not sure if it's still available but worth a shot to check out.
I would say if you are tottally not sure then go real big say 60" or 65" then there will be no question to weather or not you'll notice a differance.:devil: I know when i finish my setup in the back room that is what i'm gonna do, right now i have a 52" and i can tell from it's size that if i move it back there i'll wish i had more being that it is a bigger room.
 
#17 ·
Bambino, if you would have read my original post carefully, you would have seen where I mentioned that the wall unit we are placing the new TV in cannot accommodate anything beyond a 58" and we cannot do the home theater in any other room, nor can we re-arrange the room; the screen must be a 58 inch...

So, the suggestion of going "even bigger" is not suitable in this particular case.
 
#22 ·
Its all about immersion, if you can fit a larger screen absolutely go with it especially for movies, only time not to go larger is budget or if the unit would be so large as to cause neck/eye strain from having to look back and forth to see the entire screen.
 
#23 ·
Thanks for your input, holmes.

I am totally in the camp which believes any amount of bigger is better -- the situation is this, though: We definitely can't fit anything larger (even by one inch if my judgement is correct) than a 58" screen in this space -- but will this make us feel more "immersed" as you put it as compared to the 50" it would be replacing? At least somewhat?

We definitely wouldn't be struggling with the neck/eye strain as you mention (and which I understand) because the screen would never be that big that we would have to do that.

Again, thanks.
 
#24 ·
Yes I do think it will be worth the upgrade, as was stated earlier that is a 35% increase in viewing area. It is all about getting a higher Field of View aka FOV, depending on which group you want to adhere to you should have a FOV of between 40%-60%.
 
#25 ·
I didn't mean to disregard the previous suggestion regarding the viewing area percentage -- I was just interested in your thoughts in a more detailed sense; I apologize for that.

Can you explain to me a bit more about this "FOV" and how it relates to the distance one sits from the screen?

BTW -- I didn't know there was a Beverly Hills, Florida! Where exactly is that in the state?
 
#26 ·
No need for any apologies, was just trying to give credit to the earlier poster who was correct.

FOV basically means if looking straight forward how much of your vision is filled by the screen. What's the best percentage is different depending on who you ask, THX recommends 40%, SMPTE used to recommend 30% for SD and 45-60% for HD but I believe they are changing this again. This again relates to the eye/neck strain I commented on earlier, which unless you were sitting <4-5ft from a 58" won't be a factor as you said.

Beverly Hills, FL is on the gulf coast of central florida and basically heavens waiting room, it is in citrus county and half way between Tampa and Gainesville.
 
#30 ·
No need for any apologies, was just trying to give credit to the earlier poster who was correct.
Oh, okay; I was just apologizing because I didn't want you to think that I was disregarding the suggestion given by that member...hence, the response to your "as has already been stated" sentiment...just didn't want you to think the piece of advice was being disregarded.

Thank you for the understanding here.

FOV basically means if looking straight forward how much of your vision is filled by the screen. What's the best percentage is different depending on who you ask, THX recommends 40%, SMPTE used to recommend 30% for SD and 45-60% for HD but I believe they are changing this again. This again relates to the eye/neck strain I commented on earlier, which unless you were sitting <4-5ft from a 58" won't be a factor as you said.
No, this would definitely not be a factor (the neck/eye strain)!

Beverly Hills, FL is on the gulf coast of central florida and basically heavens waiting room, it is in citrus county and half way between Tampa and Gainesville.
LOL -- what do you mean heaven's waiting room...the old folks?

Are you a Buccaneers fan?
 
#27 ·
I'd suggest taking a look at a panny plasma at 58" if they are still making them. The difference it big, but I'm not sure I'd pay the cash to make the change. I'm the guy who normally lets stuff break before replacing it though.

I will say if you ever want a truly big picture there is nothing like a projector. They can be royal pains, but size really does matter most to most folks I've talked too.
 
#31 ·
I'd suggest taking a look at a panny plasma at 58" if they are still making them. The difference it big, but I'm not sure I'd pay the cash to make the change. I'm the guy who normally lets stuff break before replacing it though.
I am definitely considering the Panny 58" Plasma, and although I really want an LCD for the 240Hz-plus refresh features (for that "soap opera" video look from film -- just a personal preference), I don't believe there are any 58-inch LCDs on the market (I could be way off here though).

I understand what you're saying, totally, about not changing or fixing something until it's broke, and we have definitely taken this into consideration with this SXRD, as we're STILL on the FIRST bulb for this rear projection set, and there appears to be no signs of dimming or weakness...there is truly NOTHING wrong with the set, and it even has all its original "FULL HD" and EnergyStar stickers on the front! The thing is, I would like to get as big a display as I can into the wall unit cabinet, based on our increased seating distance in this new house, and that seems to be around a 58...

I will say if you ever want a truly big picture there is nothing like a projector. They can be royal pains, but size really does matter most to most folks I've talked too.
Believe me, I really want a projector -- but the way in which we would have to have it installed, and the way I would want it, we simply could not afford it in the least bit, and I am going to get into this next in response to the member who suggested this...
 
#28 ·
Definitely recommend projectors when it can work, you could always use a drop down screen in front of the cabinet and have it drop down when you really want to have full immersion though it does take a little more work to keep both the current unit and add the projector.
 
#32 ·
You know something, holmes? This is the route we wanted to take with the room -- well, the angle I wanted to take at least...that is, dropping a screen in front of the wall unit for film watching. The thing is, I would want this to all be automated and powered so it really didn't interfere with everyday room asthetics and such, and THAT adds up, big time...

In other words, what I was thinking was, have a screen installed into a custom made soffit in the ceiling above the wall unit cabinet...then, have a projector mounted on the other end of the room which would drop down (motorized) just when the screen drops...but then, there is the work of the motorization and the cabling which would have to do into the ceiling to run to the equipment in the wall unit...

This puts it out of budget for us...but what a thought! :bigsmile:
 
#33 ·
The thing is, I've tried this before, and with all the sets in the store going at the same time around you, it's hard to judge -- in a store, a 50-inch or so screen doesn't seem to look at all as big as it may be when you get it home or in a different room, and I've experienced this multiple times.
 
#34 ·
View your current tv from 8 feet and then view it from 13 feet. At 13 feet, is the picture size adequate for you, or would you want a bigger picture?
After getting used to watching a 50" screen at 8 feet, you probably won't want to go to a smaller FOV when viewed from 13 feet. Obviously the bigger 58" screen will be better (I would get a plasma unless your viewing room will be very bright). Is it worth spending more money? Only you can decide that.
I would get the bigger screen if money permitted.
 
#40 ·
Thanks for your opinions. I know what I see when we sit, currently, at 13 feet away from the 50", and it seems like it could use more screen...

Is this what you were suggesting?
 
#37 ·
Yes, it is hard to get any immersive effect at 156 in. from a 50 in. display. I'm afraid you won't become immersed with a 58 inch display either. Not to say it won't improve your viewing, since it is 35% more viewing area. It's just to say that to get back to what you were experiencing at 8 feet viewing distance requires a rather large screen, 81 inches to be exact.

When TV shopping, be careful about the contrast ratio of your set. SXRD was uncommonly good at native contrast, even rear projection, so you may not be happy with some of the LCD sets, which show a lot a muddy blacks by comparison. Contrast ratio cannot be viewed in a TV store, since the pictures are calibrated for strong, bright, green pictures in a fully lit room.

You may want to do some homework on this, and be sure to consider plasma too.
 
#42 ·
Yes, it is hard to get any immersive effect at 156 in. from a 50 in. display. I'm afraid you won't become immersed with a 58 inch display either. Not to say it won't improve your viewing, since it is 35% more viewing area. It's just to say that to get back to what you were experiencing at 8 feet viewing distance requires a rather large screen, 81 inches to be exact.
Oh, well, it's not that we need to become "as immersed" as we were with the previous seating distance and this current screen -- just something a bit moreso than we're at now with the 50 in this larger room we're in.

But to be fair, I mean, we simply cannot fit nor afford (even if they were available) an 81-inch TV (taking projection screens out of the equation) and so herein lies the dilemma and core of this thread: If a 58" display -- the largest that will fit in the alocated area we have -- isn't going to immerse us in a satisfying experience during cinematic indulgences, what's the solution? Does it even make sense to go up to a 58" then?

When TV shopping, be careful about the contrast ratio of your set. SXRD was uncommonly good at native contrast, even rear projection, so you may not be happy with some of the LCD sets, which show a lot a muddy blacks by comparison. Contrast ratio cannot be viewed in a TV store, since the pictures are calibrated for strong, bright, green pictures in a fully lit room.

You may want to do some homework on this, and be sure to consider plasma too.
I understand what you're saying; indeed, the blacks on my SXRD are superb. The blacks on LCDs haven't been improved upon much? I indeed plan on doing a ton of homework here...would you consider a Plasma over an LCD? I'm asking because I happen to like those "refresh" features on the LCDs which, as a side effect, make film based sources look like superimposed video...

Plasma has no such features, correct, because of their frame interpolation solutions?
 
#39 ·
Oh and yes citrus county is a haven for the retiree, and I do like to watch the bucs when they aren't blacked out but I haven't been to game in over 12 years now.
 
#44 ·
Cool.

I was a big Bucs fan back when they had their original uniforms with Bucco Bruce on the helmet and they wore the red and orange -- remember Testaverde and what was his name...Salmon?

And I'm not even from Florida!

I was actually a Patriots fan too, of the old team with the old uniforms...:T
 
#46 ·
I'll try this out when I can.

How did you come to that formula?
 
#61 ·
The Onkyo 706:
I don't care about THX certification or the THX listening modes very much, but do use the preamp outs.
For my front 3 speakers, I use an external amp, the ATI AT1506 that is located in the shelf under the AVR. The 4 surround sound speakers are powered by the Onkyo.
I can't comment on the sound or power of the Onkyo since I use the ATI amp but I am surprised at how warm the Onkyo gets. Before buying the Onkyo I already read comments about how Onkyo's tend to be much warmer than other AVR's and I figured this wouldn't be a problem in my situation because it would not be closed in and wouldn't be driven hard because of the outboard amp. Well, it's not a problem but it's definitely warmer than any of the other 4 or 5 AVR's I've used. I couldn't imagine how hot it would get if it were running the front 3 speakers. The Onkyo (driving 4 surround speakers) gets warmer than the ATI amp (driving the 3 main speakers) which is 450W/channel. I have recently moved the Onkyo from the middle shelf to the top to get more air circulation.
 
#62 ·
The Onkyo 706:
I don't care about THX certification or the THX listening modes very much, but do use the preamp outs.
For my front 3 speakers, I use an external amp, the ATI AT1506 that is located in the shelf under the AVR. The 4 surround sound speakers are powered by the Onkyo.
Right -- I noticed that in the pic...

Are you calibrated via the receiver's Audyssey system, or have you manually calibrated?

I can't comment on the sound or power of the Onkyo since I use the ATI amp but I am surprised at how warm the Onkyo gets. Before buying the Onkyo I already read comments about how Onkyo's tend to be much warmer than other AVR's and I figured this wouldn't be a problem in my situation because it would not be closed in and wouldn't be driven hard because of the outboard amp. Well, it's not a problem but it's definitely warmer than any of the other 4 or 5 AVR's I've used. I couldn't imagine how hot it would get if it were running the front 3 speakers. The Onkyo (driving 4 surround speakers) gets warmer than the ATI amp (driving the 3 main speakers) which is 450W/channel. I have recently moved the Onkyo from the middle shelf to the top to get more air circulation.
Yeah, the Onkyos have been notorious for getting ridiculously hot -- some 605 owners, in fact, have described being able to almost fry eggs on top of their topplates they were so warm, and that's with an AVR that specs at "90 watts per channel." I never experienced this heat though with my units, although my 605 is very well-ventilated in the entertainment cabinet it's in, behind a glass door and with nothing placed on top of it.

Wow -- your ATI puts out 450 watts a channel? That's the kind of power I wanna feed my Polk RTi12 mains someday...are the ATIs affordable at all?

Can you tell me a bit more about the API's connection to the AVR -- I mean, do the preouts of the Onkyo present a "voltage matching" issue with the amp? I have heard horror stories about some lower-priced AVRs and their preouts not feeding a strong enough gain signal to an outboard power amp, even though the AVR was equipped with preouts for that purpose...do you find this with the API and Onkyo? Is there an input level system in the AVI to control the volume gain?

Do you feel the back channels are sufficiently powered off the Onkyo? I think that is going to be my next upgrade -- get a new Onkyo AVR that has preouts, and add a three-channel amp for my front soundstage, letting the AVR feed the surround channels.
 
#63 · (Edited)
Calibration:
My system is first calibrated with outboard eq's. Then the Audyssey calibration is run.
ATI AT1506 amp:
(review) http://www.wwsp.com/ati/hometheatermagazine.htm
Bought in 2003 for $1200. This is the 6 channel version, 150w/ch (hence the "6" in AT1506. 3ch version would be the AT1503.) I run my 6ch amp bridged into 3ch, 450w/ch. It runs great with both AVR's that it's been hooked up to, my present Onkyo and before that was a good Yamaha circa 1999. There is no gain adjustments on the ATI, simple plug-n-play. And it works/sounds great.
Originally the 6ch amp was powering all speakers, but I read a review suggesting the bridged 450watts. I switched to bridged and said "Holy Crud!! This Is Good!!" and I never looked back.
AVR with surround:
The Onkyo does a great job with the 4 surround speakers. Granted, they are not power hungry. For WAF (and budget) I used decent in-ceiling speakers: JBL, 6", 3-way. But I have no doubt the Onkyo would do wonderful with more demanding speakers.
 
#64 ·
Calibration:
My system is first calibrated with outboard eq's. Then the Audyssey calibration is run.
Do you like the results Audyssey gives? You wouldn't prefer manual adjustments?

ATI AT1506 amp:
(review) http://www.wwsp.com/ati/hometheatermagazine.htm
Bought in 2003 for $1200. This is the 6 channel version, 150w/ch (hence the "6" in AT1506. 3ch version would be the AT1503.) I run my 6ch amp bridged into 3ch, 450w/ch. It runs great with both AVR's that it's been hooked up to, my present Onkyo and before that was a good Yamaha circa 1999. There is no gain adjustments on the ATI, simple plug-n-play. And it works/sounds great.
Wow -- no gain adjustments? Is this common?

Originally the 6ch amp was powering all speakers, but I read a review suggesting the bridged 450watts. I switched to bridged and said "Holy Crud!! This Is Good!!" and I never looked back.[/quote]

Is this something you recommend I look into -- that is, getting a six channel model and bridging for just the front three channels? Or should I look to a good three-channel power amp?

AVR with surround:
The Onkyo does a great job with the 4 surround speakers. Granted, they are not power hungry. For WAF (and budget) I used decent in-ceiling speakers: JBL, 6", 3-way. But I have no doubt the Onkyo would do wonderful with more demanding speakers.
Good to know -- I too use in-ceiling Speakercrafts for the surround channels (actually they were pre-installed in our house when we bought it; considered a sort of "upgrade").
 
#65 ·
It's late so I'll give some thoughts on amps and later write about Audyssey.
I don't have much experience with amps so I don't know how common or uncommon gain adjustment is on them.
Outboard amps are an extra, not a basic need for home theater. Don't skimp on the basics of having very good speakers, AVR, and display because you also want to go the extra mile and have an amp. If you are in the market for a new display, I would suggest spending as much money as you can to get very good quality.
After having very good basics, then start on the extras like amps. If you're using a good quality AVR (Onkyo) then getting a standard outboard amp that puts out 100w/ch might not make a very big difference, so you would need to step up to the big boys and big wattage to really make it worthwhile.
If you can afford it all at once, more power to ya!
 
#66 ·
It's late so I'll give some thoughts on amps and later write about Audyssey.
Okay...appreciate it...

I don't have much experience with amps so I don't know how common or uncommon gain adjustment is on them.
I know two-channel power amplifiers always had these "gain" controls or "input sensitivity" adjustments (as on car audio amps) to "regulate" the output of the amp (like a more advanced volume control); I'm not that familiar with multichannel units, but maybe those don't have gain controls for each channel, as this would prove daunting to adjust. That's what's so appealing about Onkyo's (and their Integra line as well) AVRs, in that they come equipped with that "IntelliVolume" feature that acts like a source "leveler" for the volume of the receiver -- almost like a power amp's "sensitivity control."

Outboard amps are an extra, not a basic need for home theater. Don't skimp on the basics of having very good speakers, AVR, and display because you also want to go the extra mile and have an amp. If you are in the market for a new display, I would suggest spending as much money as you can to get very good quality.
Gotcha. Makes sense; perhaps that will get us back on track a bit in terms of this thread (my question of upgrading to a larger display)...but I was curious to hear your feedback in terms of your own equipment...

After having very good basics, then start on the extras like amps. If you're using a good quality AVR (Onkyo) then getting a standard outboard amp that puts out 100w/ch might not make a very big difference, so you would need to step up to the big boys and big wattage to really make it worthwhile.
If you can afford it all at once, more power to ya!
Well, if I were in the market for an outboard power amp, it sure would be putting out a whole lot more than 100 watts per channel -- that's what I want my next AVR to do (Onkyo) and then some, and THEN see if I should add on a 250-300 watt per channel external amp...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top