The History Kid Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Depending on room size you may opt for a phantom center. I would not put high investments in 4K...Video seems to be a more volatile world than audio these days. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Man they are gonna make a killing on 4k. I think unless you are getting a 80"+ or projector 4k is a huge gimmick! Big fat waste of money if you ask meI've seen a $26,000 4K projector in action on a 120" screen. No way I could ever justify it, you had to be at point blank range to appreciate it at all, and that was with a pure 4K source. Any distance at all and with a standard blu-ray and I feel like my JVC could hang just fine, plus would come with a free partially used Cadillac with what you'd save. If you are sitting very close to a TV for video games I could see it but otherwise 4K mainly just impresses people in the showroom who walk up and gawk from 3' away.funny you should say that cause unwound totally take a 5,000$ projector and a 21,000$ Cadillac any day of the year over a 26,000 projector. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyrc Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 ... otherwise 4K mainly just impresses people in the showroom who walk up and gawk from 3' away. Great point! In many showrooms there is a flatscreen path that causes people to snake through a trail that puts them much closer to each of the monitors than they would be at home. Under those circumstances, 4K would be clearly superior. A HT set up in the store is better, but people should take a steel tape with them, and stand at the distance they would be at home. I'd wait ,,, let's see where 4K goes. I'm biased in favor of projection on a 2.35:1 screen ("common height"). Our current system (see below), including a 'scope image 130" true width and 149" diagonal with 'scope was much more affordable than it would have been in 4K, and I expect it to last us the 10 years the OP spoke of (8 years to go). Then let's see what the industry has to offer. I've had photography as a hobby for decades, and am hopelessly in love with the late, lamented 70 mm, and I can say that our HT image quality is fine, and the facial detail is marvelous. I'd rather have a projection screen our size with standard Blu-ray resolution than a 4K approx 80" diagonal TV. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Since coming on here, I have learned to hate big box stores with a passion. The stuff I am realizing now that is pushed on us is ridiculous. 4K seems to be a waste of money to me, just can't see myself now getting a 4K set up,even though I purchased my receivers "to future proof" them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Youthman Posted January 3, 2015 Moderators Share Posted January 3, 2015 I know I won't be buying anything 4k for quite some time. I tend to stay at the middle of the electronic curve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattSER Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 The only video advancement any of us should be looking forward to is OLED. The best picture quality breakthrough since Sony perfected CRTs in the late 90s and Pioneer perfected plasma in 2008. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvu80 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) ... And some TVs are compliant with HDCP 2.2 but it is a real limiter on picking a limitation on amp/receiver selection and being it is hardware it cannot be upgraded via software. Garyrc, your suggestion is interesting but kind of defeats the simplicity of using the receiver as the collection point for content with one HDMI to the TV. I need to rethink my plan that was coming together very nicely (and included buying more Klipsch speakers). Some options: 1) Leave 4K out of the plan, possibly even at the TV level. Proceed with everything else. 2) Stay with 4K, get whatever compliance I can now and hope for the best as this content evolves over the next couple of years. 3) Get a compliant 4k TV now, use my existing stereo sound system as TV sound, add my surround sound capability in a year or so when this HDMI/HDCP stuff gets better defined and supported. I see your dilema, and you are absolutely right. You have some needs (audio sounds like crap with the old 2 speaker setup due to new 5.1 broadcasts) and you have some wants (65+" 4K HDTV.) And right now the technology is all promises, but you don't want to invest in something now and be outdated immediately. Some alternatives: The 2015 AVR models are due out in a few months, April I think. (somebody please chime in with the actual release dates). You might consider waiting until the 2015 models are out, which will in all likelihood have the upgraded HDMI 2.0. Or if you don't want to pay top dollar for the "bleeding edge" technology, why not pick up a used AVR from a forum member? For $200 or so you can have 5.1 to play with to see if it will solve your audio problem for the immediate future, and it won't cost you a bunch. (like this Denon) https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/154615-fs-denon-avr-1612/#entry1819484 I think once you have your AVR, the TV purchase will make more sense for your needs, since that 4K standard is in the process of changing as well. And you DO want to listen to 3.0, 3.1 and 5.1 yourself and see what things sound like in YOUR living room. That is why I recommend a strong center speaker, because I know how it sounds my living room. Edited January 4, 2015 by wvu80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edc Posted January 4, 2015 Author Share Posted January 4, 2015 I hear the message "don't get whacked out on the 4K implications" and that sounds most logical to me. I spent my career in the computer industry and understand the implications of trying to chase evolving standards -- could be costly and unsuccessful. I need to look again at the TV implications and see if there is any return on going with the latest 4K sets, I know they attempt to do some signal upgrade on the 1080 content etc. It might be necessary to get the 4K in order to get other "latest technology". I probably should ignore the 4K topic in amp/rec selection. A few basic questions on speakers and surround sound amps: 1) Is there something in the audio content that defines which speakers (L, R, Center, etc.) different audio goes to? Or is it just determined by the amp/rec? 2)If there is something in the content that tells the amp to send audio to a specific speaker on a 5.1 system, what happens if I just send normal stereo music to the amp -- does it to to FL and FR only or to all speakers or? And what happens if I only have some of the 5 channels (e.g. 3.0) does all audio get spread on the 3 channels? 3)I obviously have some missing knowledge on the basic surround sound concept and design. Any suggested url's to go to to read about this? Thanks again to all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) I am going to +1 for the phantom speaker. No center, and when you toe in the forte's, the people not sitting in the sweet spot will be further off-axis, thereby naturally centering the phantom. There isn't a good match for a Forte except another Forte or a Heresy. Most poeple don't have room for a clunky Heritage speaker in the center position. Edited January 4, 2015 by mustang guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Chi-town Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 An Academy center channel would fit the bill nicely. Like I said earlier; 2 ears, 2 speakers! Best regards, John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edc Posted January 5, 2015 Author Share Posted January 5, 2015 On center speakers. I want to get this right as I have read more than once that the center is critical. And, my primary goal is to be able to better hear and understand dialogue without blasting my wife out of the room. I have read several opinions on phantom vs center speaker. I am still somewhat confused on this as the opinions are varied and diverse (like religion and politics). For the moment I am leaning towards a good center speaker. I originally mentioned a Klipsch 52 center to go with my Forte's. Many of you suggested the 62 instead so that is my current plan. John, you mentioned the Academy (which I believe to be an older Klipsch model), do you think the Academy is better than a new Klipsch like the 62? What about the 64, is that even better? I also read that the center should be matched to the front L and R spkrs, does that mean my best center would be a third Forte? I would prefer a horizontal speaker to go on top of a cabinet but I guess at this point I can change anything. Any advice? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minermark Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 1. Welcome 2. Do not be in a hurry 3. Baby steps (trying to save you money here) 4. Read, and i mean read the threads, everything you wish to achive has been covered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Youthman Posted January 5, 2015 Moderators Share Posted January 5, 2015 I recently learned this firsthand...the best sound will be achieved with three identical speakers up front. I loved the RC-64 until I bought the LaScalas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 agreed with above. IF YOU CAN fit a third forte then by all means that is THE PERFECT match. if not id still stick with the rc-62ii. i have never heard an academy but i have heard youth man say he was never really impressed with them. and i trust his word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paducah Home Theater Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) Personally I don't like the idea of phantom centers for movies, not that you can't ever get good imaging from two speakers, but that this isn't how audio is recorded. Sometimes there is on the center, sometimes its all three fronts, sometimes its just one side, sometimes it shifts between the center and one side, and sometimes its even the front two mains without the center. You wouldn't get all of this with a phantom center. Whether a recording only plays through the two mains, all three fronts, or only through the center would come through exactly the same with a phantom setup. There are tons of movies where you hear dialogue through a center only but then for effect it shifts and sound only comes out of the mains in order to have a wider sound stage. All those effects would be lost, nothing would shift, the same two speakers would plow right through it. Temporarily its fine but I don't think that should be a permanent solution. Edited January 5, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Personally I don't like the idea of phantom centers for movies, not that you can't ever get good imaging from two centers, but that this isn't how audio is recorded. Sometimes there is on the center, sometimes its all three fronts, sometimes its just one side, sometimes it shifts between the center and one side, and sometimes its even the front two mains without the center. You wouldn't get all of this with a phantom center. Whether a recording only plays through the two mains, all three fronts, or only through the center would come through exactly the same with a phantom setup. There are tons of movies where you hear dialogue through a center only but then for effect it shifts and sound only comes out of the mains in order to have a wider sound stage. All those effects would be lost, nothing would shift, the same two speakers would plow right through it. Temporarily its fine but I don't think that should be a permanent solution. nailed it!! i agree 100 percent with this. i have tried phantom center many times and it just doesn't replace a center channel to me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.