Pro custom HT build to highest standards - Cowshed Cinema

Which aspects of this build thread have you found useful? Check your top five.

  • Overall design of cinema

  • Information on sound containment

  • Discussions about sound hardware (amps, speakers, etc)

  • Discussions about video hardware (PJ, Blu-ray/UHD players etc)

  • Information on acoustics and acoustic treatments

  • Photographs and drawings of work in progress

  • Ideas suggested by Members

  • Graphs and measurements of audio

  • Subjective impressions of sound quality

  • General choice of hardware and reasons behind the choices

  • Inspiration for your own Home Cinema project


Results are only viewable after voting.
I had a shock when I worked out the traps required to "fix" my 31.3Hz room node! Fortunately I can use 1/4 & 3/4 room length sub locations so that's fixed.

Yes, this is the first thing anyone should do wherever possible: fix the room/speaker interface by getting the room dimensions right and the speaker/subs position right wrt to MLP and each other.

I do have a minidsp 2x4HD and have often wondered about getting the Dirac update for it to see how Dirac sounds in my room without spending too much. I could easily pass the centre channel though it or Left and Right, which are the worst channels in the room and bass manage from those channels.

I highly recommend Dirac Live. IMO it is without question the most effective of the (affordable) room EQ solutions.

I'm working my way up to a HTP-1, seems like the only fully functional Dirac with DBLC and minimal bugginess, when funds allow. I can get trade prices on Nad and Arcam but having followed their forums I think I'll be avoiding them.

People whose opinions I respect are very enthusiastic about the HTP-1. If I was going to (forced to) change my hardware, that is the unit I'd want.

The main thing for me is if a movie scene is shot in a sound dampened padded cell I'd like it to sound like I'm in that sound dampened padded cell! Some of my extended family seem to think a padded cell is an appropriate place for me to spend my leisure time so there's that too.

Haha. But yes, when the action is in a padded cell, you want to be in a padded cell. When it is in an aircraft hangar or a swimming pool, that is where you want to be, and when it is in a desert, likewise. For me, this is one of the joys of m/ch movie sound when well-mixed and well-reproduced.
 
Last edited:
Hi @kbarnes70. Re-reading this thread (I followed with interest at the time) after extending my room and changing some kit, with a view to improving the acoustics with treatment in room (not soundproofing - very happy with it).

Can I ask what configuration you have in your panels, starting from the screen? From the images it looks like:

Row 1 (closet to screen) - diffusion top and bottom, absorption in the middle
Row 2 - 3 x absorption?
Row 3 - same as row 1
Gap
Row 4 (tan coloured ones) - 3 x absorption?

I stopped there as I have 4 GIK panels on my rear wall already (2 x monster bass traps, 2 x 244 bass traps), and I wouldn't be able to do much more with the back 3rd of my room due to seats, speaker column, kit rack etc.

Just trying to get a feel for how the panels have been staggered with absorption and diffusion, as opposed to just treating everything with absorption panels.

Thanks in advance
 
Hi @kbarnes70. Re-reading this thread (I followed with interest at the time) after extending my room and changing some kit, with a view to improving the acoustics with treatment in room (not soundproofing - very happy with it).

Can I ask what configuration you have in your panels, starting from the screen? From the images it looks like:

Row 1 (closet to screen) - diffusion top and bottom, absorption in the middle
Row 2 - 3 x absorption?
Row 3 - same as row 1
Gap
Row 4 (tan coloured ones) - 3 x absorption?

I stopped there as I have 4 GIK panels on my rear wall already (2 x monster bass traps, 2 x 244 bass traps), and I wouldn't be able to do much more with the back 3rd of my room due to seats, speaker column, kit rack etc.

Just trying to get a feel for how the panels have been staggered with absorption and diffusion, as opposed to just treating everything with absorption panels.

Thanks in advance

Row 1 is, as you say, diffusion top and bottom and absorption in the middle.
Row 2 is, also as you say, absorption only.
Row 3 is a repeat of row 1.

After the gap is is absorption.

Rows 1, 2, and 3 are then repeated towards the rear of the room, out of shot on the attached image. Both sides of the room are identically treated.

Since the build was finished, I measured and listened for several weeks and eventually added additional absorption where the yellow lines are on the attached image - directly on the wall above the pre-existing panels and also on the sloping part of the ceiling. This consisted of DIY absorption panels (finished in black) which were custom-sized to fill the space available.

Additionally, you can see in the image the overhead 'cloud' which is suspended from the ceiling above. This consists of 6 wide panels, all absorption but the 'in between' panels have approximately double the thickness of the others, so it goes, 1st panel half-thickness, 2nd panel full thickness, 3rd panel half thickness and so on for 6 panels. There wasn't much science to that - the installers installed the thinner panels and I felt we needed more overhead absorption to clean up the imaging of the 4 Atmos overhead speakers. I now get a better sense of directional movement over my head when the content calls for it (eg in the notorious Atmos demo disc tracks).

I always intended to add absorption above the screen on the sloping part of the ceiling but have never got around to it, so I am not sure if it would be worthwhile or not. There is massive absorption behind the screen (rockwool filling an approx 3ft gap between screen and rear wall).

Overall, all of this works well. The initial treatments (the fancy looking ones) were modelled acoustically in software by the panel manufacturers to arrive at the final layout and type of panels needed. I would have preferred in-room measurements to determine that, with some experimental positioning of different panels until the room measured nicely, but my installer was not, I shudder to say, very keen on measuring. All measurements taken were taken by me using REW and it would have been impractical for me to get involved during the actual build, so I had to trust the software modelling. In the end, it seems to have worked pretty well. (I did have several conversations (by email) with the panel manufacturers and built up some trust in them).

2020-12-14_11-52-36-png.1422423
 

Attachments

  • 2020-12-14_11-52-36.png
    2020-12-14_11-52-36.png
    437.3 KB · Views: 338
Row 1 is, as you say, diffusion top and bottom and absorption in the middle.
Row 2 is, also as you say, absorption only.
Row 3 is a repeat of row 1.

After the gap is is absorption.

Rows 1, 2, and 3 are then repeated towards the rear of the room, out of shot on the attached image. Both sides of the room are identically treated.

Since the build was finished, I measured and listened for several weeks and eventually added additional absorption where the yellow lines are on the attached image - directly on the wall above the pre-existing panels and also on the sloping part of the ceiling. This consisted of DIY absorption panels (finished in black) which were custom-sized to fill the space available.

Additionally, you can see in the image the overhead 'cloud' which is suspended from the ceiling above. This consists of 6 wide panels, all absorption but the 'in between' panels have approximately double the thickness of the others, so it goes, 1st panel half-thickness, 2nd panel full thickness, 3rd panel half thickness and so on for 6 panels.
Hi Keith. What percentage of your walls and ceiling would you say is covered with absorption?
 
Yes, this is the first thing anyone should do wherever possible: fix the room/speaker interface by getting the room dimensions right and the speaker/subs position right wrt to MLP and each other.

Well I didn't really get this right, while I tried to learn as much as possible from the system in my flat, I didn't really start learning properly until I started building in the new house.

I had a lot of business travel at the time so I think I read Floyd Toole's book ten times on the planes :) I might have even understood some of it, I think it stopped me making too many mistakes at the beginning.

Reading a lot of build threads like yours taught me a lot too, maybe I should start a build thread. Would you say it's helped you significantly or was it just a bit of fun to document everything?

The biggest issue and the most expensive to fix was buying a screen that's too big. It pushes the L&R speakers into the corners causing some horrible response between 80 & 200Hz, bass traps behind the speakers has helped a lot but a bit more space would have made a big difference. If I pull the speakers out in front of the screen they measure and sound a great deal better! This also causes me to struggle for light for decent HDR, in my defence I was under pressure from my father in law for whom no screen is ever big enough!

I also discovered when they launched the JVC NX7 that I'm so far at the max with my X7000 I can't quite fill the screen with an NX7 as the projector is longer as well as a longer zoom (unless you scale to 4k res).

I'm planning to drill a hole in the living room wall to fix all these problems, put the projector in the hallway behind. I can then run high lamp, have some zoom to spare, space for a longer projector and even move the screen forward and put the speakers behind one day. Lesson learned... don't let the father in law call the shots.

Thanks to the equally bad influences of Chris Nolan and Michael Bay, he now wants me to get a 16:9 screen the same width as our scope screen, he's being ignored this time.

I highly recommend Dirac Live. IMO it is without question the most effective of the (affordable) room EQ solutions.

The guys at my friendly local hifi and home cinema shop say the same, they are of the opinion that it's the most significant development in home audio for some years. They are always trying to sell me Arcam or Nad though. I've had some pretty good discussions with the UK Arcam rep over what dirac can and can't fix, we had a few discussions over how terrible their firmware is too!

I have thought that maybe sometime soon there will be some cheap minidsp 8x8 units on the second hand market as people upgrade to the HTP-1. Will aim for the HTP-1 though if work picks up in the new year.

Haha. But yes, when the action is in a padded cell, you want to be in a padded cell. When it is in an aircraft hangar or a swimming pool, that is where you want to be, and when it is in a desert, likewise. For me, this is one of the joys of m/ch movie sound when well-mixed and well-reproduced.

Well it's always easier to add the reflections back in from the recording or with an upmixer than it is to remove your own rooms ones.
 
Well I didn't really get this right, while I tried to learn as much as possible from the system in my flat, I didn't really start learning properly until I started building in the new house.

I had a lot of business travel at the time so I think I read Floyd Toole's book ten times on the planes :) I might have even understood some of it, I think it stopped me making too many mistakes at the beginning.

LOL. IKWYM. What I did was read the second half of the book (the practical examples) first and then go back and do the theory stuff afterwards. I don't know if this helped. Most of my help came from forums.

Reading a lot of build threads like yours taught me a lot too, maybe I should start a build thread. Would you say it's helped you significantly or was it just a bit of fun to document everything?

A bit of both. I did get plenty of useful advice along the way. Most of all, you get a ton of encouragement, and when things aren't going well (inevitable) it keeps you going until they improve.

The biggest issue and the most expensive to fix was buying a screen that's too big. It pushes the L&R speakers into the corners causing some horrible response between 80 & 200Hz, bass traps behind the speakers has helped a lot but a bit more space would have made a big difference. If I pull the speakers out in front of the screen they measure and sound a great deal better! This also causes me to struggle for light for decent HDR, in my defence I was under pressure from my father in law for whom no screen is ever big enough!

I had a similar problem in the Hobbit Theatre. I solved it by swapping speakers for ones that could go underneath the screen. I picked M&K S150s, which as well as having a low profile, sound fantastic.

I also discovered when they launched the JVC NX7 that I'm so far at the max with my X7000 I can't quite fill the screen with an NX7 as the projector is longer as well as a longer zoom (unless you scale to 4k res).

Tricky to resolve that one. I spent hours and hours with PJ calculators online, inputting all the info for various PJs. I ended up with an Epson, which I am delighted with, but my initial choice (JVC) didn't have the right throw ratio for me.

I'm planning to drill a hole in the living room wall to fix all these problems, put the projector in the hallway behind. I can then run high lamp, have some zoom to spare, space for a longer projector and even move the screen forward and put the speakers behind one day. Lesson learned... don't let the father in law call the shots.

Thanks to the equally bad influences of Chris Nolan and Michael Bay, he now wants me to get a 16:9 screen the same width as our scope screen, he's being ignored this time.

Good call. The wide (scope) screen must always be wider than the 16:9 screen. That is the point of it. When you go to a commercial cinema and they are showing trailers etc in 1.85:1, part of the excitement is when the feature comes on and the screen 'widens' to 2.39:1. Your scope content should always be wider than your 1.85 content. IMO.

Of course, you might really want to go 'IMAX' but I think it's a fool's errand personally. I doubt anyone can recreate the impact of an 80 foot high true IMAX screen, at home. And there isn't much original content anyway.


The guys at my friendly local hifi and home cinema shop say the same, they are of the opinion that it's the most significant development in home audio for some years. They are always trying to sell me Arcam or Nad though. I've had some pretty good discussions with the UK Arcam rep over what dirac can and can't fix, we had a few discussions over how terrible their firmware is too!

Yeah, the measuring software is nice to use but updating FW isn't a pleasant experience - at least not with my (now ancient) DDRC-88A units. Worth it in the end though. Dirac Live is the real deal.

I have thought that maybe sometime soon there will be some cheap minidsp 8x8 units on the second hand market as people upgrade to the HTP-1. Will aim for the HTP-1 though if work picks up in the new year.

Yes, if I was going to swap my 88As, it would be for the HTP-1, although it is overkill really in terms of its features sets (for my needs).

Well it's always easier to add the reflections back in from the recording or with an upmixer than it is to remove your own rooms ones.

Indeed.
 
Thanks. That is quite a lot. I'm so close to starting my room, getting quite excited.

It is exciting! Yes, 50% is a lot. And really, my entire room is a 'treatment' of sorts thanks to that 'pistonic' action of the walls and ceiling serving as a sort of bass trap. One of the good things about treatments if you are building the room yourself is that you can start with a 'basic' set, covering the usual suspects, then measure, then add more and measure again, until you hit the point where you can't improve things any more. You can do this with rockwool just bunged into pillowcases or something while you are experimenting, and then make proper panels afterwards, once you know the impact they will have. That was my process in the Hobbit Theatre. Rockwool is fairly inexpensive, so it's easy and cheap to experiment. I highly recommend making your panels, as hardly any real DIY skill is needed and you can make a load over a weekend. As always, the first one is a bear and then all the rest are easy. You can save a ton of money that way. If you want the 'footballer room' look, then buying ultra gorgeous panels is the way you have to go. I overspent on the panels the installer wanted to use, but gave in to him in the end. I could have got the same result for half the price if I'd used GIK stuff.
 
An amusing point re the above post. In the Hobbit room, when I was experimenting, I got the rockwool delivered and had nowhere to put it prior to starting to use it. So I just ended up laying it around in the cinema room. And I was staggered at the improvement I got from this! No science, no measuring and rockwool more or less randomly stuffed in the room, still in the plastic wrap it comes in! :)
 
It is exciting! Yes, 50% is a lot. And really, my entire room is a 'treatment' of sorts thanks to that 'pistonic' action of the walls and ceiling serving as a sort of bass trap. One of the good things about treatments if you are building the room yourself is that you can start with a 'basic' set, covering the usual suspects, then measure, then add more and measure again, until you hit the point where you can't improve things any more. You can do this with rockwool just bunged into pillowcases or something while you are experimenting, and then make proper panels afterwards, once you know the impact they will have. That was my process in the Hobbit Theatre. Rockwool is fairly inexpensive, so it's easy and cheap to experiment. I highly recommend making your panels, as hardly any real DIY skill is needed and you can make a load over a weekend. As always, the first one is a bear and then all the rest are easy. You can save a ton of money that way.
Yeah I'll be making my own. My DIY skills are decent, and I'll be making some diffusers as well as absorbers. I really like the way the panels look in your room with LED strips above and below, so there's a good chance I'll be stealing that idea (I had previously thought of having the LED strips running vertically).

If you want the 'footballer room' look, then buying ultra gorgeous panels is the way you have to go.
Well I don't have the money for that. And 'footballer room' doesn't sound like the sort of thing I'd like (it conjures up a tacky/chavvy image), but if you mean anything like the smart panels you have, then I'm in.
 
Yeah I'll be making my own. My DIY skills are decent, and I'll be making some diffusers as well as absorbers. I really like the way the panels look in your room with LED strips above and below, so there's a good chance I'll be stealing that idea (I had previously thought of having the LED strips running vertically)..


Yes, the LED striplights are cheap and give a terrific bang for the buck. Mine come with a controller and you can make them any colour you want, literally. And make sure you get dimmable LEDs so you can set different levels of light for different purposes. I set mine to bright for walking in (this is all controlled by the Control4 switch panel near the door, or by the remote) and then when the movie starts they dim to nothing. If you watch sport with pals, then it's nice to have some illumination instead of all sitting in the pitch dark, so you can set the LEDs to a nice, dim red or blue or whatever. Or even to your team's colours. For what these LED strips cost, they look a million dollars in action. Concealing the strips behind the panels is the way to do it. Above and below, or even all around each panel might work - experiment before you finally fix them.
 
Last edited:
Well I don't have the money for that. And 'footballer room' doesn't sound like the sort of thing I'd like (it conjures up a tacky/chavvy image), but if you mean anything like the smart panels you have, then I'm in.

My panels do look nice I must admit, despite the hard time I gave the installer about them. What I mean by 'footballer room' is those HTs where almost all the money has been spent on the decor, seats and so on, presumably so when people walk in they go "wow... gasp... it's amazing". My intention was to have a room which looked nice enough with the lights on, but remembering that 99% of the time you're in there, the lights are off. So I spent a small part of the budget on the appearance and the biggest part on the acoustic performance and the sound containment. I already had most of the hardware from the Hobbit room, but my hardware is nothing 'special'. Decent Emotiva amps with a ton of grunt, a relatively cheap Marantz 7010 serving as a pre-pro, secondhand JBL monsters for LCR, new, but inexpensive pro Tannoys for surrounds and re-purposed Tannoys from the Hobbit room for overheads. Cables etc are all decent gauge copper but not a name brand or anything - the sort you can legally run inside walls. The two Dirac 88As were fairly expensive. The Seaton Submersives were quite costly, but they are the last subs anyone ever buys and I had them in the Hobbit room anyway. Bluray player is Oppo and Panasonic for 4K, PJ is the 4K Epson and I can't even remember the model number - it will be about 3 or 4 models back now. If the room is right, you don't need to spend silly money on hardware IMO. If I didn't already have the Emo amps, I'd have chosen Crown Pro amps - terrific, powerful, cheap. Pig ugly, but that doesn't matter as you don't really see them. The last thing I personally would choose is 'hifi' brand stuff, especially speakers as, IMO, 'domestic hifi' gear just can't cut it in a cinema with these fantastic demands on clean SPLs at very high levels etc.
 
My intention was to have a room which looked nice enough with the lights on, but remembering that 99% of the time you're in there, the lights are off. So I spent a small part of the budget on the appearance and the biggest part on the acoustic performance and the sound containment.
I'm planning my room with the same goals in mind.

secondhand JBL monsters for LCR
I'm also interested in the JBLs, but I think they're too big for me. They'd go behind the screen, but there depth would eat into my room a bit more than I'd like.
new, but inexpensive pro Tannoys for surrounds
How much are the Tannoys?

PJ is the 4K Epson and I can't even remember the model number
Er, the 9300 :rolleyes: :laugh:

The last thing I personally would choose is 'hifi' brand stuff, especially speakers as, IMO, 'domestic hifi' gear just can't cut it in a cinema with these fantastic demands on clean SPLs at very high levels etc.
Agreed.

PS - Your previous post quotes a couple of my posts, but you haven't added a comment or anything?
 
LOL. IKWYM. What I did was read the second half of the book (the practical examples) first and then go back and do the theory stuff afterwards. I don't know if this helped. Most of my help came from forums.

I had two years of house hunting with 6 months of that working away from home in Amsterdam so plenty of reading time. The living room setup was 99% dismantled while the flat was being sold so no chance to do much other than read about stuff.

I had a similar problem in the Hobbit Theatre. I solved it by swapping speakers for ones that could go underneath the screen.

Now that's an interesting approach, my center speaker (MA C350 currently under the screen) has a pretty flat response and integrates with the subs perfectly as it's sealed. Two more of those would be an interesting development. I will have to move it in to position and make some measurements, hadn't thought of that.

I got a good enough price on the Silver 8's I have for L&R that I would probably get most of my money back second hand. Probably I'll just try to get the best I can from what I have but it's an interesting solution.

Tricky to resolve that one. I spent hours and hours with PJ calculators online, inputting all the info for various PJs. I ended up with an Epson, which I am delighted with, but my initial choice (JVC) didn't have the right throw ratio for me.

Oh I did the PJ calculators thing, to death, decided the right thing was a 3m screen. About to place the order when a little voice kept saying but, but, but, you have a wider picture than that on the wall...

What I really should have done was built my own screen, now I've built projector shelves, acoustic panels and bass traps a screen would be easy, back then it seemed too much of a challenge. If I'd built it it would be trivial to dismantle and make it a bit smaller.

Good call. The wide (scope) screen must always be wider than the 16:9 screen. That is the point of it. When you go to a commercial cinema and they are showing trailers etc in 1.85:1, part of the excitement is when the feature comes on and the screen 'widens' to 2.39:1. Your scope content should always be wider than your 1.85 content. IMO.

Definitely, now I have a scope screen I wouldn't want anything else, scope feels like home cinema, when I see a 16:9 screen my brain goes "big TV".

Now this is a pet peeve with all the motorised lens PJs I've seen.

They need to zoom out smoothly from 16:9 to scope, not lurch around shifting, then zooming, then with a clunk and finally focus! I considered an old style prism anamorphic especially for the gradual widening as it goes from widescreen to scope :))

A friend who does motor control software for a living maintains it's not so hard to adjust speed on the fly and integrate the position and speed of motors to arrive at the final lens memory. We need to lobby the relevant manufacturers for a firmware update or get them to contract my friend to do it.

I tried mounting the JVC at mid screen height just to see if it would smoothly zoom out but it still manages to lurch about. How about the Epson? I did audition an LS10000 but the demo room used a lumagen so i didn't see how it handled lens memory changes.

Maybe a better approach would be to try to get madshi to add a gradual resize to madvr, he'd probably only do it for the envy though.

Of course, you might really want to go 'IMAX' but I think it's a fool's errand personally.

I find this pretend IMAX all a bit silly, I remember going to the real IMAX screen in Montreal down on the waterfront, that was impressive. To me all this variable aspect and what gets called IMAX now just looks like it's meant as a TV movie, straight to TV, it's the right shape after all.

I saw that Tenet has been projected with bars top, bottom and both sides in some cinemas in India, four different aspect ratios, what was he thinking or smoking? In my cinema it will be cropped to scope and that's the end of it.[/QUOTE]
 
Row 1 is, as you say, diffusion top and bottom and absorption in the middle.
Row 2 is, also as you say, absorption only.
Row 3 is a repeat of row 1.

After the gap is is absorption.

Rows 1, 2, and 3 are then repeated towards the rear of the room, out of shot on the attached image. Both sides of the room are identically treated.

Since the build was finished, I measured and listened for several weeks and eventually added additional absorption where the yellow lines are on the attached image - directly on the wall above the pre-existing panels and also on the sloping part of the ceiling. This consisted of DIY absorption panels (finished in black) which were custom-sized to fill the space available.

Additionally, you can see in the image the overhead 'cloud' which is suspended from the ceiling above. This consists of 6 wide panels, all absorption but the 'in between' panels have approximately double the thickness of the others, so it goes, 1st panel half-thickness, 2nd panel full thickness, 3rd panel half thickness and so on for 6 panels. There wasn't much science to that - the installers installed the thinner panels and I felt we needed more overhead absorption to clean up the imaging of the 4 Atmos overhead speakers. I now get a better sense of directional movement over my head when the content calls for it (eg in the notorious Atmos demo disc tracks).

I always intended to add absorption above the screen on the sloping part of the ceiling but have never got around to it, so I am not sure if it would be worthwhile or not. There is massive absorption behind the screen (rockwool filling an approx 3ft gap between screen and rear wall).

Overall, all of this works well. The initial treatments (the fancy looking ones) were modelled acoustically in software by the panel manufacturers to arrive at the final layout and type of panels needed. I would have preferred in-room measurements to determine that, with some experimental positioning of different panels until the room measured nicely, but my installer was not, I shudder to say, very keen on measuring. All measurements taken were taken by me using REW and it would have been impractical for me to get involved during the actual build, so I had to trust the software modelling. In the end, it seems to have worked pretty well. (I did have several conversations (by email) with the panel manufacturers and built up some trust in them).

2020-12-14_11-52-36-png.1422423
Excellent - thanks as always. I think I am going to 'collaborate for success' (aka copy) your setup as far as I can, including the ceiling panels.
 
I'm planning my room with the same goals in mind.

I'm also interested in the JBLs, but I think they're too big for me. They'd go behind the screen, but there depth would eat into my room a bit more than I'd like.

Although quite wide, the 3677s are not all that deep at about 11 inches. ( 65 x 651 x 292 mm (30.125 x 25.625 x 11.5 in). Although discontinued they are still available and are amazing value for money now.

How much are the Tannoys?

IIRC I paid £800 for four. Got them direct from the manufacturer or distributor via my Installer.

Er, the 9300 :rolleyes: :laugh:

Haha. That's the one! :)

PS - Your previous post quotes a couple of my posts, but you haven't added a comment or anything?

More than likely a cock-up. I'll look back and see if I intended to add something.
 
Now that's an interesting approach, my center speaker (MA C350 currently under the screen) has a pretty flat response and integrates with the subs perfectly as it's sealed. Two more of those would be an interesting development. I will have to move it in to position and make some measurements, hadn't thought of that.

Using the M&Ks underneath the screen enabled me to go much wider on the screen than I could have otherwise.

What I really should have done was built my own screen, now I've built projector shelves, acoustic panels and bass traps a screen would be easy, back then it seemed too much of a challenge. If I'd built it it would be trivial to dismantle and make it a bit smaller.

I looked at building my own screen too. There's a company that provides everything you need all from one source - I can't remember the name now, but google should find it. It looks pretty straightforward. I suspect I paid too much for the Cowshed screen - it cost me £2,400 which is crackers now I think about it. Some fancy material, but I reckon any decent AT material would give the same result.

Definitely, now I have a scope screen I wouldn't want anything else, scope feels like home cinema, when I see a 16:9 screen my brain goes "big TV".

Exactly the same here.

Now this is a pet peeve with all the motorised lens PJs I've seen.

They need to zoom out smoothly from 16:9 to scope, not lurch around shifting, then zooming, then with a clunk and finally focus! I considered an old style prism anamorphic especially for the gradual widening as it goes from widescreen to scope :))

I am not finding any issues with the Epson 9300. It zooms smoothly and locks right into place. In 4 years I have never once needed to adjust it.

I tried mounting the JVC at mid screen height just to see if it would smoothly zoom out but it still manages to lurch about. How about the Epson? I did audition an LS10000 but the demo room used a lumagen so i didn't see how it handled lens memory changes.

The installers programmed my Control 4 with two special buttons, one for 1:1.85 and another for 1:2.40. When you press either button, the lens rezooms and the masks go up or down (depending which button you pressed) so that framing is correct. (The automated masks are really cool and one thing the installers really nailed). It is all very smooth on the Epson and locks precisely into the correct final position.

One party trick I do for first timers in the Cowshed is to use 1:1.85for the trailers etc and then when the main feature starts, I let the studio's ident, logo etc happen in 1:1.85 and then hit the scope button just before the movie begins. I always get a big "wow" as the screen opens up before their eyes to its full magnificence of 3.5m wide. :) They think it is impressive at 1:1.85 but when they see it balls-out, well....

I find this pretend IMAX all a bit silly, I remember going to the real IMAX screen in Montreal down on the waterfront, that was impressive. To me all this variable aspect and what gets called IMAX now just looks like it's meant as a TV movie, straight to TV, it's the right shape after all.

Yes. Liemax really winds me up. I have to travel to Sheffield to see a proper IMAX screen (it is 80 feet high). But even then, I never really enjoy IMAX sound. Seems to me it sacrifices subtlety for sheer loudness.

I saw that Tenet has been projected with bars top, bottom and both sides in some cinemas in India, four different aspect ratios, what was he thinking or smoking? In my cinema it will be cropped to scope and that's the end of it.

That's my solution too. I hate movies which change AR all the time. Really takes me out of the movie when it happens. Just draws attention to itself way too much.
 
Yes, the LED striplights are cheap and give a terrific bang for the buck. Mine come with a controller and you can make them any colour you want, literally.
Yeah, I have some in the kitchen.

And make sure you get dimmable LEDs so you can set different levels of light for different purposes. I set mine to bright for walking in (this is all controlled by the Control4 switch panel near the door, or by the remote) and then when the movie starts they dim to nothing. If you watch sport with pals, then it's nice to have some illumination instead of all sitting in the pitch dark, so you can set the LEDs to a nice, dim red or blue or whatever. Or even to your team's colours. For what these LED strips cost, they look a million dollars in action. Concealing the strips behind the panels is the way to do it. Above and below, or even all around each panel might work - experiment before you finally fix them.
Yeah I think just above and below is good, so that light reflected of the screen can't hit them and reflect back. The ones I have are dimmable and multi-colour, but I won't have Control4 or similar, and I don't want to faff, I just want to hit the light switch and that's it. But I guess it's not a lot of effort to set them to low if we're using the room to watch sport or something, but I'm not sure we'd use the cinema room for that. With LEDs the option will be there I guess, which is no bad thing.
 
Although quite wide, the 3677s are not all that deep at about 11 inches. ( 65 x 651 x 292 mm (30.125 x 25.625 x 11.5 in). Although discontinued they are still available and are amazing value for money now.
Yeah they're about 2" deeper than the DIYSG HTM12s, which means my screen would need to be another 2" into the room. It's a small amount, but it all adds up. I don't want to be too close to the screen - I'll already be a fair bit closer than the manufacturer recommends (Seymour XD).
 
Yeah I think just above and below is good, so that light reflected of the screen can't hit them and reflect back.

Mine are set behind the acoustic panels so there's no chance of light hitting them and reflecting. You don't need the LEDs to be visible at all - they just bounce light off the wall. This assumes your panels are set off slightly from the wall, creating an 'air gap', which is useful acoustically.
 
Mine are set behind the acoustic panels so there's no chance of light hitting them and reflecting. You don't need the LEDs to be visible at all - they just bounce light off the wall. This assumes your panels are set off slightly from the wall, creating an 'air gap', which is useful acoustically.
I won't have an air gap, as I just don't have the space.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom