Thanks, I also read you shouldnt be messing with phase below 100Hz as it makes little difference?

Is this effectively the same performance as the JTR RS1?

I can tell you the black floor of the nx5 is way better than the Epsons unfortunately for the person asking for help Maybe a used NZ7 with an anamorphic lens will be helpful to get more light from the laser and the anamorphic lens. An HTPC with madvr for tone mapping will also help with the lower output but there is a limit apecially with such huge screen

Dear Matthew, Let me clarify some details about my setup: My screen is a 215-inch diagonal (2.35:1 aspect ratio), not width as previously mentioned. I've positioned the center channel on the floor, angled toward the audience, and created a phantom center by combining it with the center height speaker. While I recognize that the left and right speakers are placed too far apart for my viewing distance, this was a conscious design choice. Regarding the screen selection: I considered the Stewart Microperf acoustically transparent screen but ultimately decided against it. At my preferred viewing distance, I could detect the perforation pattern, which reminded me of the screen door effect common in lower-resolution projectors. (I wasn't aware of Seymour as an alternative at the time.) I agree that the JVC doesn't exhibit screen door issues, even from close viewing distances. I acknowledge the brightness limitations of my JVC projector. However, five years ago, this was an acceptable compromise while waiting for brighter laser projectors to become available, as it allowed me to achieve my other desired cinema specifications. My main question is: Given my screen size and dedicated dark room, would you recommend the Epson QL3000 over the DLA-NZ800 or Sony Bravia 8? After watching your Christie review, I think I can anticipate your response! 😂 By the way, I'm impressed with your pronunciation of my last name-it's the most accurate I've heard from any nonnative speaker.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ PS: It would be great if projector manufacturers would have anamorphic lenses out of the box or at least offer one. Most movies are wide screen and 30% of the projector light is overshot. One would think the primary use for $5k+ projectors are movies. Probably manufacturing anamorphic lenses is more expensive than regular lenses…

If his screen is 215 inches diagonal for a 2.4:1 aspect ratio, then it is 7 ft high by 16.8 ft wide. His throw distance for the larger width needs to be at least 23.5 ft and for the smaller 16:9 image needs to be no farther than 35 ft. If he wants to sit 12 ft from the screen he will be viewing a 16.8 ft wide screen. The projector has 1800 lumens output, which converts to 525 nits - which should be enough for HDR. I need to study the luminance math a bit more to see how lumens, nits, and foot lamberts relate to screen size.

@Zachary_Setzer aww that sucks, not sure if Poes knows if he's a dealer or not

I have 165 AT inch screen with 0.89 gain. Went from LS12000 to QL3000 and it's a huge difference. Highly recommend QL3000. I would strongly suggest tone mapping processor like MadVR, it makes a very noticable difference, especially with blacks. Without it due to high projector brightness blacks are just grey. You will need to calibrate and set the correct brightness, which for me is at 198 nits.

I just wanted to share 3 things I learned from switching from 98 inch TV to 128 and 160 inch Projector setup then up to Apple Vision Pro. If someone interested out of all 3 options by far Vision Pro best visual experience its not even close (if you want to view alone lol): 1. Lenses Sharpness is actually underrated, I tried C2 Ultra + JMGO N3 Ultra Max + Leica Play 1, and the one I want to use in 160 inch screen its the Leica easily, Leica lowest in brightness between them from my experience yet its best because of clarity. 2. Screen material more important than going for higher budget projector, first maximise your material while targeting specific brigthness then save for better projector. 3. The bigger you go the harder for you to accept smaller. Not what she said.

Nice Mr Poe's really nice!!! Very good answers!! 👍👍👍

I think he may be better off with CenterStage XD instead of Enlightor Neo given the screen size. At 12 feet, he shouldn't be able to see the weave and it's 10-20% higher gain--he needs every bit he can get. If he's not going to switch to AT, the Studiotek 130 would probably be the best option with that big a screen. Pricey for that size though. Anything more aggressive than that will probably be prone to hot spotting and distortion at that viewing angle.

Very cool Matt, I run ARC and for my seat I run 5 measurements, I'll try adding some more and see what happens.

I've just setup a floor to ceiling 4m wide 180in ish acoustically😢 trans screen using the Epson LS12000 and it just about manages a decent enough picture.

definitely would love a Neo screen like you have, do they sell that in raw materials form?

If the THX viewing angle/distance measurement is wrong today, what's the accepted standard? I'm currently on a 97" OLED at just under 11' and it seems to work wonders.

This is akin to why distortion in for subwoofers in car audio systems is so hard to detect -- they're normally in a carpeted trunk.

As far as I'm concerned, there's far too many variables that come into play to have just one set standard to blanket everything. It doesn't make sense. I agree with everyone else here who has mentioned to just list what the movie was mastered at and leave it at that.

I had pioneer receivers. I had never heard any noise

Learn a lot. Thanks. Mabuhay.🇵🇭🐺🙏🤝

Could you request a Valerion Visionmaster Max for review, Matt? Thanks!

Im about yo build a Dayton Ultimax ll 18in Sub with the carbon fiber cone paired with daytons SPA1000 and build a HDF box for it not gonna lie im really excited about it. I'm ready to see how much more oomph itv had over my 2 x 12 setup that are 200w rms each one peaks at 750w the other 400w the klipsch R121sw

Hi Matthew, are there any other softwares you know of besides Trinnov that could possibly automate Waveforming using a miniDSP HTx which would allow 4 subwoofers in the front of the room and 4 subwoofers in the rear of the room? Also, would it screw up Waveforming if the 2 middle rear subwoofers were recessed 4-5 feet than the 2 outboard rear subs? It's a little hard to explain but one of the two rooms I want to do Waveforming has 2 9 foot openings one on the side another in the rear and I can get 2 subs in the rear on each side of the 9 foot opening and could put 2 center subs on the wall about 4-5 feet back of that pathway.

Just as a point of interest, Dolby's Atmos Room Design Tool for mix rooms defaults to a 79dB monitoring level.

I'll be receiving my valerion pro 2 loaner in a few weeks and in June I'll have the valerion max .

Valerian I think is made by AWAL who lost the legal case against Epson recently and were ordered to market accurate specs e.g. From 3000 lumens to 2000 lumens.

valerion had a ton of good reviews. Then youtube folks i trust tested it. They were unimpressed

I think what is happening here is the grow of Projectors in china where they get a common chip and each do their own work of software and lenses to get achieve outstanding results, for example: Valerion Pro 2: Black levels JMGO N3 Ultra Max: Brightness/colors Leica Play 1: Sharpness Hisense C2 Ultra: the one that started it all So as you can see it's all 0.47 chip that was spread around with each doing their signature touches on. Also the software side of these projectors bring money. If you ask me the days of JVC/Sony high end projectors are numbered, I have XW7000ES + JMGO N3 Ultra Max + C2 Ultra + Valerion coming soon for me. It's getting very close between these lifestyle to the high end of the market: It's just a matter of combining Valerion Black levels to Leica Sharpness and N3 Ultra Max in which I will say my Sony is dead

What does the in-room response for your system look like at the main listening position? The reason I'm asking is to see how "hot" we should be running our subwoofers (+3 db/+5db/+10db/etc.) relative to the mains and what is generally considered "good sounding" to most people.

Is 90dB peak 0dBfs? So then 72dB is -18dBfs? Or is 90 dB peak -15dBfs (105-90=15) and 72dB is -33dbfs?

How do you know that you are watching the movie at 72dB? It seems impossible to know because every movie has different mastering levels

Thanks for asking my question so thoroughly, very helpful and informative

When you speak of reference level, what are you measuring? I was at an AES meeting with Tom Holman a few years ago and he made it very clear. I don't remember the exact value, but it's something like this: Dialog should be 82 db in a movie theater and 78 db in a home. The way those numbers were determined was that he took a poll from dozens of seasoned mix engineers and asked them what level sounds right, and then took the average. There was only 1 or 2 db of difference between the professionals. He also took a poll of his USC students, and even among the students there was only 2-3 db of difference. When I see KZbinrs talking about "listening at reference" what are they talking abut? The number on their processor? And yes, kids movies are LOUD!! I assume that's because homes with kids are loud too. Mom can turn the volume down and the kids will still hear everything.

Thank you for this video and sharing your knowledge on here. Do you know if the Kaleidescape versions of these films are being mixed the same way as the other home release versions or are they closer to the theater releases?

I’ve been wondering the same thing myself lately. Such a difference in playback levels with the Master volume set at the same level between individual streaming services and multiple discs. Disney had to be mastering most of their content at lower levels. Also I have noticed that my playback level is significantly louder (at the same Master Volume) since I switched to my Marantz AV10 with Buckeye Amps connected via XLR compared to my old setup with a Denon 4300 and an Outlaw 7140 amp (for the bed layer). Doesn’t calibration with Audyssey MultEQ-X calibrate to hit around 75dB with the MV at 0dB. Stuff I could listen to at -5dB on the Denon seems like I’m being blown out of room even with the MV at -15dB on the AV10. I did customize the curve slightly with a 3dB bass shelf and a high pass shelf +1dB to +2dB but nothing major. Is the louder volume due to the XLR having a higher level pre-out signal?

Thank you 👏🏼👍🏼✌🏼🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧

I find that the different brands have materially different house sounds, some of which I don’t enjoy. I think that choice is an important starting point, even though the sound of the entire “system” will be affected by various other factors as well.

I took some measurements tests with my subwoofer facing me vs facing the wall and it performed much better facing the wall due to sbir elimination. I have my sub about 3in from the wall, but its a small 10in sub

I choose processors based on DACs even though the implementation matters more than the type. I have an HTP-1 because it has AKM 4493 DACs and Dirac. Best value in the market at $4K in my opinion. And of course, a well-treated dedicated room is essential.

As always an amazing and insightful video!!! With regards to X curve and small room (and with your experience which is more than most!!) what would you typically roll off your high frequencies at when you calibrate a system? Currently I have a Trinnov and use the moderate setting. I’m curious now if I’m rolling off my highs too much?

So 75dB isn’t the “standard” anymore for home cinema? Is there a way to get an “new” average number?

love your videos and content but that was just a ramble and as clear as mud

How I rough guess for music. Turn it up till you hear the hiss, breaths and small details. If they werent meant ro be heard they wouldnt be there.

Unfortunately that was the case with Gladiator 2. In cinema the dynamic was really dull, at home that was also the case. Most sound effects were not much louder that the voices and I had to turn up the level so much that the loudness of voices was on the border of too loud to actually get some nice kick when there were special effects. Really disappointing. Older movies from around the 2000s are much more dynamic for some reason. I watched Space Cowboys after Gladiator 2. Much better. It hat Kick and "Zing" to the special effects.

Beyond all these softwares our taste and ears are the masters that decide how the speakers and subwoofers should sound. I followed this theory and found it’s better than all the software curves. 🤓

For me, 105/115 dB is not even close to loud. The sound of a real gunshot at 1 meter distance is about 140 dB. The sniper rifle reaches 160 dB. An artillery shelling is also within those values. So, hearing gunshots at 105 dB and cannon shots at 115 dB is not nearly enough for the lifelike experience we all are trying to achieve when building a dedicated home theater. I know that, at those insane loudness levels, you might end up getting deaf, but today’s situation is a bit absurd, too. Remember that scene in Black Hawk Down when a soldier loses his hearing because the skirmish is too loud? As a viewer, I didn’t understand why it happened because the sounds I’d heard hadn’t been loud enough to make me deaf. That fact by itself dragged me out of action and made it clear for me that I was not inside the movie (as the director probably wanted me to believe) but in a safe and comfortable room. Of course, reaching those loudness levels would require equipping home theaters with public cinema speakers. And that’s an unrealistic scenario. But when someone says he prefers listening at -10, I feel the urge to ask: “What was the point of building your home theater then? Why not just go with a soundbar?”

Regarding the natural response of a speaker in a large auditorium, does it follow the X curve without or with room treatment? Audyssey argues that more reverberant rooms need more rolled off highs, i.e. smaller rooms need more rolled off highs, not less?

TBH I found your casual style of wear much more pleasing. Thank you for your wisdom Matt.

Explains why I have to push the volume up so much while watching Pixar movies.

I always got the impression back when I was reading all the curmudgeonly forums was that "reference" level meant about $500 dollars in front end. So something to easily surpass. Reference gear was always some midrange stuff. I think it's meaningless.

In the world of smartphones and apps I find that a simple app can transform the sound of my system in the same way that a physical equalizer, preamp, receiver would in the “old days”. So here’s my question, are apps making physical components obsolete? I have an app on my phone that adds incredible low frequency boost and it completely/amazingly transforms how my system sounds. It suddenly sounds like I added a high in subwoofer and all because a simple app. I think the smartphone can replace a lot of physical components that we once used in the past for sound enhancement.

You are one of the MOST underrated audiophile channels on KZbin.. I tip my hat to you, sir. 🥹😎🙌🏼🙌🏼