Thanks for the reply, much appreciated. I don't think I can afford to mount the projector lower on the wall to use a HP screen, I need as much height as I can get to make it over top of the people on the couch. Are LCD projectors the best quality in today's market? What makes them more desirable than other technologies?
You can use an HP, if you wanted, because the "off-axis" angle is going to be mild anyways, when taking into account the length of throw and shorter ceiling height. However, it could very well be overkill gain (?) if the screen is small, and with excellent light control. Otherwise, I am a fan.
I don't think I can go as wide of a screen as most of you suggest, I took some exact measurements tonight and my audio rack is 26" wide, my tower speakers are about 12" wide... so I would need a little more than 3' on the right side of the screen, and to keep it symmetrical I'd keep the same distance on the left side too, obviously.
Subtracting those requirements from a 11'6" wide room would leave us roughly with enough room for a 5'6" wide (not diagonal wide) screen. According to Carada, at a standard aspect ratio of 1.78:1 that would give me just enough room to squeeze in a 72" diagonal screen with the frame.
OK. Even if you might not enjoy the benefits of vertically arrayed drivers for your center, you can still have the front three on the same plane, if you wished. I've been implying (on multiple occasions?) that you can have the screen ABOVE all three fronts. If we were to go this route, you can have 7'2" wide screen, while maintaining visual symmetry.
Josten, I know you're saying I should consider a wider aspect ratio, but I think I should go with a screen that will accomodate the most widest range of material I watch which is various movies and standard TV. Going with a 2.35:1 or even a 2.4:1 would leave black bars somewhere on the screen more often than not.
Umm. Welp, if it was me, I'd want a widescreen for that same exact reason: because by far and away do most movies have wider aspect ratios. The proportion of "full-screen" 16:9 is actually pretty small, at least in my collection. IIRC, even a lot of cartoons aren't even full-screen, such as Kung Fu Panda, Ratatouille, Cars, etc. IIRC that is. Hmmm what IS 16:9?.... Band of Brothers. Umm....
Well, if this dedicated HT is mostly for TV broadcasts, then yes you would have mostly 16:9 viewing. However, most TV broadcasts have pretty poor PQ compared to BD anyways, and I probably wouldn't mind having this as a smaller pic, with bars.
I would go with an acoustically transparent screen, but moving the screen a feet closer to my seating position when I can't move my couch back any farther wouldn't work out very well IMO... Such a big screen at 7 or 8 foot viewing distance? Too much to take in all at once, I bet.
What size exactly are you talking about? You are probably right when considering 16:9 at 7 ft, but with 2.4:1 at 8 ft... you might be pretty surprised. Let's say that you were the typicaly nutty videophile who spent over 10k on anamorphic lens, motorized sled, outboard VP, with 2.4 screen. These folks are normally using 1:1 width:distance, and that would mean
well over 100" diaganol. Don't knock it till you see it. There's a reason why
most folks with such ARs have these viewing angles.
I know I've already told you to check out jvgillow's system, that he's referred to already, but here's a
pic. Note how the three speakers are underneath. Three identically arrayed upright towers for the fronts is where its at. He obviously knew exactly what he was doing.
Another AH'ers setup. This is anamorphic, CIH type, belongs to mperfct:
Do it tRiXtA!
The towers are roughly 3 feet give, maybe a little more. I'll take exact measurements tomorrow.
That leaves you... 4'7" of height for display. Let's make it 4' even for margin. Heck, let's make it 3.5 ft. With 2.4 aspect, that's a pretty sweet and wide screen. Approaching 100" diag if you wanted?
I'd like to start nailing down my exact plan of attack on what gear I am going to buy and from where, so to start off I have been looking at that Panny that Josten keeps recommending, and the epson too. I'm clueless about the brands of screens, other than that I think a standard 1.78:1 screen, and that I can fit a maximum of a 72" diagonal screen with frame so the image doesn't spill onto the speakers or AV rack.
I highly recommend AVS as a store. Projector People is a very good vendor too, and they'll talk to you, I know, just call. Just settle on the PJ first. Fire at wall first. Trust me. Do screen last. Trust me. I keep recommending the Pana to you, because its already a value leader, but even more so because you can achieve maximum display with your particular constraints. And TBH, people have been DYING to have such ARs for their display.... but the costs have always been exorbitant... until the Panny.
Is LCD projector the best way to go for me and should I mount it upside down or just leave it sitting on the mounted shelf?
Thanks all!
LCD and LCoS are your real choices at this budget, and also are typically more flexible in zoom and shift compared to DLPs. LCoS PJs rule as far as I am concerned, and this is the tech that is used in JVC and Sony. They are invariably more expensive, however, you can get one of these at your rough budget. These don't have the super-cool programmable presets that Panny has, however. You are stuck with 16:9, unless you got a lot of money, or time, or both, to run an anamorphic CIH setup.
That being said, the JVC pj's that Sherardp and I have are sorta like the Kuros's of the PJ world. Similar prices, known for awesome black levels, suffer some in color accuracy.
My pic is absolutely disgustingly good. I mean, if I showed it off to BMXTRIX, he might start recommending outboard VP and offer me a deal on ISF calibration or something, but put it this way, I've entertained a film director of 10 years, just inducted into DGA this year, and he says its the most amazing pic he has ever seen. 75 sq ft of screen + PJ, for $4k.
In your case... I'd still really consider wide AR. Look thru your movie collection, and seriously, tell me what % of them are really at 1.78:1. I will guess 20%
at the most, but just a guess.
Almost forgot: shelf works perfectly fine. And, my pleasure.
