Jump to content

HT Upgrade: Wet Bar, AT Screen, Fireplace.


WakeJunkie

Recommended Posts

I will be building a Spandex AT screen. I ordered fabric swatches this week.

The delima I am dealing with now is "How big is to big?" 100" is nice, but to small for my taste.

Primary viewing is from the Beanbag. 8.5ft from screen. Looking to go with about 120" - 130" but don't want to have to turn my head to see the screen.

Suggestions welcome.

 

Our 130" -- true width, not diagonal -- 2.35:1 AT screen is great at about 12 feet, but a very few movies, in which they don't use steadycam, make us a little seasick.  We're talking maybe 4 or 5 movies out of the approx two a week we have run over the last two years.  For your 8.5 feet distance, you might want to go a bit smaller.

 

Does Spandex have a sheen at all? Or is that just a tradename for fabric designed for movie projection?  A sheen would be bad.

 

We love our Semour AT screen, and they do sell the fabric separately for DIY folk, and they send out free swatches.  At 12 feet, you can't see the weave at all, but you might notice it at 8.5 feet.  It is almost completely acoustically transparent, but the very slight very high frequency treble attenuation is totally compensated for by Audyssey, as confirmed by REW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our 130" -- true width, not diagonal -- 2.35:1 AT screen is great at about 12 feet, but a very few movies, in which they don't use steadycam, make us a little seasick.  We're talking maybe 4 or 5 movies out of the approx two a week we have run over the last two years.  For your 8.5 feet distance, you might want to go a bit smaller.

 

Does Spandex have a sheen at all? Or is that just a tradename for fabric designed for movie projection?  A sheen would be bad.

 

 

 

If you can manage through the 32 pages you will see I built this screen 2 years ago and am very pleased.  It has no sheen, you can't see the weave at 9ft (actual viewing distance), and it is less than 1/4 the cost of Semour.  I have a matching front 3 RF-7ii's and can not distinguish any audio loss or change through the screen.

 

Your 130" wide 2.35:1 is 141" diagonal vs my 130" 16:9 screen which is 122" when masked down to 2.35:1.  Your 141" screen at 12ft is probably comparable or bigger than my 122" screen at 9ft.  It is definitely not to big.  I don' think going bigger would be an improvement at that distance.  It really is perfect, full emersion without feeling like a tennis match.

Edited by WakeJunkie
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Gary, I recently spent a few days with wake and can vouch for his thoughts.....the 120" 16:9 at 9' was absolutely gorgeous.  No "sheen" in the the fact that you can see through it.  I never saw any weave, perforation etc.  It just looked like my non-AT 103" screen but his is grey and mine is white.  Image color was fantastic with great contrast.  At no point did I ever feel the screen was too large.  It's encouraging to me because I am moving up to a 150" 2.35.1 screen and feel it's going to be a great fit for my setup.

 

 

 

I like it! It goes with the room and the free Klipsch poster that I did not get. Just rubbing it in if any of the Klipsch people are reading this since I entered the contest and did not get one, lol.

rub it in! I got one :)

 

 

I too received one but I had to write an article (aka a novel) for the Klipsch Joint to get mine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Our 130" -- true width, not diagonal -- 2.35:1 AT screen is great at about 12 feet, but a very few movies, in which they don't use steadycam, make us a little seasick.  We're talking maybe 4 or 5 movies out of the approx two a week we have run over the last two years.  For your 8.5 feet distance, you might want to go a bit smaller.

 

Does Spandex have a sheen at all? Or is that just a tradename for fabric designed for movie projection?  A sheen would be bad.

 

 

 

If you can manage through the 32 pages you will see I built this screen 2 years ago and am very pleased.  It has no sheen, you can't see the weave at 9ft (actual viewing distance), and it is less than 1/4 the cost of Semour.  I have a matching front 3 RF-7ii's and can not distinguish any audio loss or change through the screen.

 

Your 130" wide 2.35:1 is 141" diagonal vs my 130" 16:9 screen which is 122" when masked down to 2.35:1.  Your 141" screen at 12ft is probably comparable or bigger than my 122" screen at 9ft.  It is definitely not to big.  I don' think going bigger would be an improvement at that distance.  It really is perfect, full emersion without feeling like a tennis match.

 

 

Great!  Congrats!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you both for the update.

... his is grey and mine is white ...

 

Interesting.  My old favorite screen was a Silver King, which had, well, silver fabric.  Possibly finely powered aluminum. It was made for old style Polaroid 3-D, but from dead in front it had what looked to me to be best color and sharpness I've seen.  The reason it wouldn't work for HT, is you had to be right in front, or the brightness fell off.  The old, deeply cuved Todd-AO screen, appeared to be "oriented powdered aluminum," with each granule aimed straight forward, so one side of the curved screen didn't reflect on the other.  They advertized it as being composed of "thousand of tiny lenses."  Mad Men were here. 

 

Youthman ...150"... wow.  That's going to be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...