Anyone else just not bothered by home theatre?

[KozmoNaut]

Yes, I can’t get interested in anything tv related to be honest. Probably not rational, but I get excited by good scripts and acting, not cgi and dubbly.

I think it's perfectly rational to not really care about the spectacle, if the writing and acting can't back it up. An engaging script and convincing performance will always be more important than eye/ear candy.

A spectacle is fun in the moment, it's like a rollercoaster ride. One hell of a thrill and good straight-forward fun, but it doesn't really stay with you afterwards. Some movies simply need the big screen and huge sound setup to wow you, and that's fine. They just lose all appeal on a small screen with a lesser sound system.

Other movies work well almost no matter the system, because they have engaging scripts and gripping performances. Similarly some music will grip you even on an AM radio with middling reception, and some music requires a huge system to (physically) move you. To me, content quality always trumps presentation, though sometimes the presentation can absolutely enhance the experience. I originally watched movies like Jurassic Park and The Shining on CRT TVs at home in 4:3 format, and later got the chance to watch them in a properly big cinema, and the sheer impact and intensity was unbelievable in comparison. But only because they were already damn good movies.

 

[Doodski]

Weird... lol.. I really enjoyed the series, "All Creatures Great and Small." I watched all of them in order.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075472/

 

[Wombat]

Although I enjoy some action movies, I like a story that makes at least a bit of sense, characters with depth and quirks, unexpected but rational twists and turns, rising and falling tension, at least a bit of gritty reality, a world that isn't perfect, etc, etc. I watch a lot of foreign-language films, and enjoy seeing the environments in which other peoples live. I do not like action films based on action only with no good story and hammy acting. And that included Chinese action films which can be as bad as some of the terrible U.S. action films. However, I do occasionally watch some pretty bad films that are campy and don't take themselves seriously. I plan to watch a couple of the "Tremors" films tomorrow evening.

I have not traveled much, and enjoy settings around the globe and the occasional documentary. I remember the first episode of Nature on PBS - The Flight of the Condor, and enjoy nature, science and some outdoor sports films, especially skiing and big-wave surfing.

I am happy with my 40" Samsung LED TV and my 2-channel music system for the sound. But I am considering replacing my current smallish "bookshelf" loudspeakers with bigger ones - and adding a center channel to add clarity to dialog, because I am old and my hearing is not what it used to be. I just started thread here at ASR (LINK) about the difficulty of simply adding a proper center channel to a very good simple stereo music system. Ultimately, I think with my plan, I will be able to simply flip an input switch for the two main channels and turn on the new center channel amplifier. I do not intend to use the center channel for music listening.

That sounds like me.

 

[Wombat]

Over a half century old, but only just.

Which century?

 

[Dimifoot]

I know of someone who disagrees with OP

https://www.thescreeningroomav.com/...te-Real-World-Home-Theater-and-Listening-Room

But what does he know?

 

[nm4711]

I have mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand I don't really need surround sound. It's nice to have, but not really necessary for me.
The Center channel on the other hand is great when watching with multiple people and for better understanding dialogues. I sometimes really miss it on my stereo system. If the front channels are big enough I don't need subwoofers, but if they are only small sattelites I would rather have those.

Sometimes I really enjoy the dynamic sound of a good movie, but when it's late and I don't want to wake up other people in the house it can be annoying, because you don't understand the dialogues if you don't turn up and down the volume constantly or use a compressor.

On the TV side I use a pretty old LCD and I don't want to buy a new one. But if I have to, I would probably get an OLED screen, because I really enjoy HDR and good contrasts.

 

[Davelemi]

I'm not into movies but now that I'm sitting at home with very little to do things may change. 2.1 (Forte IIIs & SVS ND12; 65 inch Samsung) is good enough for now in my family room and typical usage is my wife and daughter watching an awful TV show I have 0 interest in.

 

[Koeitje]

I like movies and series a lot, but I simply do not have room for surround and prefer a better stereo performance anyway.

 

[Fluffy]

I've always been fussy about sound quality for music, but when it comes to watching television or movies, as long as I can see what's going on and hear the dialogue, I'm quite happy. I've never felt that a giant screen or surround sound adds much to the experience.

Friends have tried to impress me with their movie set ups, which has on occassion made me wish I'd taken some ear plugs; I don't want to deafened by gun shots and explosions, nor do I want dialogue at the volume of a drill seargent shouting in my face. At home, with some movies I prefer to watch them with small speakers that will naturally cut off above all the bass rumble.

Is it just me?

Totally. I use the same stereo set up for music and films/TV, don't see any problem. Super dynamic soundtracks that have sound effects (explosion, gunshots) at tens of DB louder than the dialog are driving me crazy.

 

[SimpleTheater]

Friends have tried to impress me with their movie set ups, which has on occassion made me wish I'd taken some ear plugs; I don't want to deafened by gun shots and explosions, nor do I want dialogue at the volume of a drill seargent shouting in my face. At home, with some movies I prefer to watch them with small speakers that will naturally cut off above all the bass rumble.

I can proudly say I would be one of your friends.

 

[Dimifoot]

There are three reasons not to implement a high quality multichannel sound system (+home theater), and sound quality is definitely not one of them:

1. Lack of financial resourses
2. Lack of spouse approval
3. Lack of property space.

(If you really, really solve n.1, then automatically n.2 and 3 are solved also)

 

[Asylum Seeker]

wow. different generation

I was born in 1969 and had a TV in the house as far back as I can remember.

 

[Thomas savage]

Nope, its not just you, however I disagree and love home theatre and good sound to go with it.

The sound is extremely important for immersing you in the film

It can be , source dependant of course.

The size of the sound has to match the size of the screen for me at least. I rigged a large 5.1 system years ago and found it overwhelmed the screen.

It was a odd experience and it was also the end of my interest in multichannel for movies at home.

 

[maverickronin]

I used to like the idea of home theater but I've become burnt out on all the BS that accompanies it.

Exponential increase in channel count and competing codecs just so IP mongers have something new to license every year and makes multi kilobuck AVRs go obsolete as fast as PCs in the 90's.

No standards on anything that matters (upmix/downmix algorithms, codecs, channel count) means that you're very likely to be buying blind.

DRM which only serves to level up the e-peen of corporate executives destroys compatibility, increases cost, complexity, and annoyance, but does nothing to stop piracy.

I don't watch TV shows or movies much any more. When I do they're all rips on my PC because that's the only way I can get them through a proper HRTF DSP chain for my headphones.

 

[Boris Badinov]

Do it. Infinity R263 is a 3 way. $500 but often on sale. I am a senior. I can now hear voices without cranking. You really need a 3 way for center. The mid-range delivers dialogue. I have used many 2 way centers and they all sucked. Of course, the Revel 3 way is what I covet. It is expensive.

I guess this is a dumb question, but how do you get a center speaker on a 2-ch stereo? Mains on chA and center run from chB?

 

[dwkdnvr]

I can certainly understand that if you only have room for one system, you will have to prioritize for 'the one you want', and if you're on this forum that will generally mean music. I fortunately can have music upstairs and movies downstairs, and in that case IMHO even a decently realized/adjusted HT system is a wonderful way to watch content. We have a 100" 21:9 projector setup with decent but by no means state of the art audio (Denon X4500, Statement Monitors / Statement Center, dual RSS390HF subs), and even though we are on the 'film' side rather than the 'blockbuster' side, I definitely agree that good audio greatly enhances the immersion for movies. Certainly being a DIY oriented guy lowers the price barrier which helps (our entire 'theater' system was under $3000, I think, despite buying and not building the speakers), but buying used/refurb can also do that.

And, I do find that a big screen and surround helps with sports as well (all you youngsters probably don't remember back when live sports were shown on TV. Ah, nostalgia for the old days)

 

[mhardy6647]

There are three reasons not to implement a high quality multichannel sound system (+home theater), and sound quality is definitely not one of them:

1. Lack of financial resourses
2. Lack of spouse approval
3. Lack of property space.

(If you really, really solve n.1, then automatically n.2 and 3 are solved also)

You did miss lack of interest.
Not everyone's interested.

I guess this is a dumb question, but how do you get a center speaker on a 2-ch stereo? Mains on chA and center run from chB?

In the early days of stereo, filling in the hole in the middle was a thing. It was a thing to the point that some amplifiers provided a mixed-to-mono line-level center channel input (some HH Scott and EICO integrated amps from the early stereo era leap to mind).

EDIT: Here's an example -- EICO ST40.

source: https://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/t.mpl?f=vintage&m=242695

There's also the add-on, Paul W. Klipsch way.
Here's one example (i.e., one implementation)

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/183089-anyone-else-into-3-channel-l-c-r-config/

 

[JeffS7444]

I've decided to get the Wharfedale Evo 4.2 3-way bookshelves with AMT tweeters and the matching Evo 4.c center

A 3-channel setup like that ought to work well with a fairly recent Marantz (and presumably, Denon) receiver: I has happy to find that my Marantz could be configured for anything from 2- to 7-point-something channel configurations, and it's room correction could be used with any of them. With my older Harman Kardon, room correction only worked with 5.1 channels, which was sort of a bummer.

 

[murraycamp]

I have mailed it in on HT. I run my lower-end Marantz AV receiver through my 2-channel system and its sounds fine.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I've always been fussy about sound quality for music, but when it comes to watching television or movies, as long as I can see what's going on and hear the dialogue, I'm quite happy. I've never felt that a giant screen or surround sound adds much to the experience.

The sound is extremely important for immersing you in the film

The sound is extremely important to me in any and all media.