Home Theater Battle: Projector vs. TV

Got questions about Home Theater, Acoustics, AV equipment, or the science behind it all? Drop them in the comments below, and I GUARANTEE to answer all the questions with a KZbin Super Feature "$THANKS" ($15 minimum) in an upcoming videos! Here's how:
Use the KZbin mobile app to open a Short or long form video. Under the long form video, select Super Thanks . If you’re watching a Short, tap Comments and then Super Thanks .
Choose the amount that you want to spend. Select "BUY AND SEND" to complete your purchase.
Your comment will be highlighted with a colorful chip, making it stand out in the comments section, and your support will be publicly acknowledged.
If you'd like to book a private acoustic consultation with me or are interested in purchasing top-tier Home Theater equipment, please visit our website: www.poesacoust....
We proudly carry industry-leading brands like Perlisten, Real Acoustix, Trinnov, RTJ and more.
Follow me:
KZbin: Subscribe to this Channel / poesacoustics
Website: www.poesacoust...
Facebook: / poesacoustics
Instagram: / poesacoustics
Email: [e-mail]

[@CycleCalm]

4:45 I thought movies were colour graded/mastered on mastering monitors, which are emissive screens, not projectors, so wouldn't that make a TV closer to representing creative intent? It certainly looks more realistic as you say. Most commercial cinemas are only SDR aren't they, except a few like the dual lasers at IMAX or Dolby cinemas. Though even then the HDR is a bit greyish and washed out looking compared to a good mini-LED or OLED TV IMO.

[@northeastcorals]

For me it's all about recreating the feel of a cinema in my own home so that means a projected image. I don't really care about arguments over screen size & light levels etc because a TV just can't make me feel like I'm at the movies in the same way a projector does. Each to their own & all that.

[@VitalYFZ]

Not yet... but it's coming. As TV's get larger they are closing that gap. TV's have a much better picture so when they can be had at a reasonable price for a 150" TV, projectors will be obsolete.

[@northeastcorals]

@@VitalYFZ Did you read my post before commenting on it? Strange response if you did.

[@VitalYFZ]

@@northeastcorals I think I commented on the wrong thread lol.

[@VoodooZ]

the assumption is that people care about matching old style projection theaters though.. especially as the new generation might not go as much.. I'm almost 50 and never really went to cinema much and find the home comfort much more important than whatever projection style gives you. so a big OLED is the only choice for me personally. My TV is slighter higher so my center can sit on a custom shelf right below it and pointing slight up. but I'll definitely testi the reflected center solution.

[@NicolaeLorimer]

Thanks! Great information on the visual aspects of the comparison.

[@Mo-tn1gm]

Each room has its own best method. For an open floorplan with bright lighting until the sun goes down a mini-LED works great. In a dark room at 9-10’ the 85” Bravia 9 produces sufficient picture quality to use with good speakers for a cinema-like experience.

[@sethfm9773]

This is a really interesting topic for me as the size of tvs looks to increase pretty rapidly with some of the new panels and the price of microled comes down over time. An approach that reflects sound off of the display and that is mounted in ceiling could be very popular but I’d like to see more information on this including best angles for placement and what dispersion or directivity would be necessary for best performance. Thanks for the video.

[@KimmoJaskari]

I mean there are 115 inch TV's. They weigh 200 lbs and you need four guys to move them. That breaks and needs service? A nightmare production imo. For my money, TV's are for casual viewing and at smaller sizes (85 and less). 120 inches or higher and it's just projector. Same thing with dedicated blacked out rooms - projector.

[@LexusAllTerrain1]

I am planning in downsize to 120" TV.😮

[@kaelmedia8693]

I would think that through twice. Being one that owns a 98’’ TV

[@SwirlingDragonMist]

What a neat idea Center channel methods are definitely a differentiator for brands going forward. They’d be wise to offer a diverse feature set in that respect, even down to the bass management and center-spread level. Theres really so many different configurations that one might want.

[@garyharper2943]

No matter how good a tv looks it still looks like tv. A Projector looks like a movie theater.

[@SwirlingDragonMist]

The hard part is getting the floor authentically sticky.

[@garyharper2943]

That and the smelly guy who always sits behind you!

[@michael-4k4000]

I'd take OLED everyday all day. They master the films on Sony OLED professional monitors.

[@northeastcorals]

100% correct.

[@paulc5389]

Oled looks very natural with way better contrast and depth if you set it up correctly. The problem is most people don't and consider a good, accurate and natural image to be dull. And you're definitely not seeing them set up correctly on a shop floor. I'll never understand why people want live action content to look like a cartoon that blinds them. But apparently it's popular so what do I know.

[@michaeldee3380]

It's down to personal preference. For movies I prefer the reflected image from a projector screen, as it's softer on the eyes and the colours are less intense and therefore everything look more natural. For casual viewing TVs are fine, but I have no need for a very big screen. So in an ideal world and if you have the space, it would be nice to have both.

[@FURognar]

Sony's "Acoustic Glass" concept where the TV produces sound directly from the screen itself is probably whats needed. Sony receivers can use those systems in combination with a center channel to cover the frequencies that the screen can't quite hit. That's probably another viable method, but Sony would have to start sharing that tech with others, and I'm not sure it would work well with LCD screens.

[@markpocock183]

As Matt said, sound quality and SPL are the issues here.

[@SwirlingDragonMist]

I’m glad they’ve started down that road. I’d love to see it be perfected.

[@paulc5389]

I believe Sony's ES receivers actually play just enough sounds from the TV in order to trick your brain into lifting up the perceived height the sound is coming from whilst still delivering the majority of it from the centre speaker for best fidelity. It spatial audio stuff is quite impressive. Unfortunately that solution is bespoke to Sony and I don't see a high quality 120" TV coming from them anytime soon. Even their 98" solutions are still only full array led. A 120" Sony oled is a pipe dream.

[@Zachary_Setzer]

I always wonder about the extreme toe-in using wave-guided speakers for this scenario. In my living room setup, I went from a Klipsch RP series towers and center (3.0 setup) to Klipshorns in the corners (15ft wide front wall, 14.5ft seating distance). I left the center sitting on the console for months, but it wasn't even plugged in. I would regale visitors with the "go put your ear up to the center speaker" move ebery now and then. Unsurprisingly, the phantom center effect is great from the MLP. But it's also surprisingly effective no matter where in the room you sit or stand, as long as you don'qt walk up to the front wall.

[@SwirlingDragonMist]

I find the motion blur of 24fps shutter speeds very noticeable and it breaks my immersion when I watch movies, going to the movie theater feels like a downgrade in quality for me, and I have no nostalgia for it whatsoever. I do appreciate motion blur as something within the creative toolbox. But not a fan of having it constantly on everything in the entire film. Variable frame rates are where it’s at in my opinion allowing for scene by scene artistic use, allowing for the filmmaker to construct with more tools. OLED clearly outperforms projection. To me it’s more desirable to be of higher visual quality than it is to be closer to an established trope. The audio compromises are a real ball buster tho. To me immersion doesn’t come from habing an exit sign glowing in the corner, or the black levels limited to the color of the projector screen receiving backsplash off the audience. To me OLED blacks are more immersive, and seeing what otherwise would be blurred is immersive, even if blur does make for a sense of intoxication, the reality of being there without blur is it’s own hyper liminal immersive quality. But good thing we have choices and get to make our systems to our own liking. It’s nice that video games are getting really fast in refresh rates now too. They have no shutter so theres no blur, and at high refresh rates it has a very nice visual presentation that is often lost in these discussions about movies.

[@paulc5389]

One he missed about Sony's actuator technology is their receivers can use them in combination with a centre to deliver just enough audio from the TV to trick your brain into lifting it up whilst the majority still comes from the centre channel. So they do have a solution for this but it's obviously restricted to just their TVs and obviously works best with oled. Unfortunately I don't see them ever making a 120" oled. So as good as it is it's a dead duck as oled will probably be replaced with qdel long before LG or Samsung even think about trying to make affordable 120" oled panels.

[@heftyfunseeker9987]

Built my dedicated room around the 97” G2 OLED - it’s incredible. No black bars because the panel just disappears against the black wall. Very cinematic. Love it for gaming too

[@andrewskaterrr]

OLED > Projector. The only downsides are no AT screen for center, not as big, and 24hz judder, which can be lessened with software. Even seeing the modified Christi “16Ks” at MWAVE wasn’t as good as an OLED picture wise (and they looked great). I think it’s funny that people want the PJ soft image when that’s what doesn’t look right. I hate going to the theater (Dolby Cimena and IMAX) because it always looks worse than my OLED.

[@PoesAcoustics]

Conversely there are many who do not like the hyper sharp image of a panel tv. I will say. Having watched movies on dvleds at huge sizes. I don’t personally like it. To me it’s too bright, too sharp, and I am not a fan of the reflective screen. I’ve been talking to some partners about using a non-AT screen in the future for those demos. I think the non-AT screens may be sharper looking and may make some people happier. JVC does it and they are about it. Everyone else demonstrates with AT screens. As a balance of compromises it makes sense. But if someone is looking for OLED picture in a projection system, it probably won’t be achievable without a non-AT screen.

[@isaiahang6739]

I have both a Sony (W)OLED and an older JVC eshift 4k projector. While the OLED has a 'better' picture, eye more color volume, brighter, sharper, infinite contrast, I like the projector for other reasons when watching film (not talking about TV here). Foremost, size matters. When many movies are 2.35 ratio, the added size from 77" to 120" (16:9) is huge. The added size actually helps resolve/bring attention to additional detail, even with 1080p resolution. Second, motion. When almost all films are 24p, the issue with OLED handling motion is a big issue for me. It really stands out. While my projector is not perfect, I prefer the motion handling a lot more. My Sony OLED, even with the "better" processing, made some of my favorite movies nearly unwatchable, unless I ramped up the motion processing which led to soap opera effect, which I personally hate. HDR presentation is definitely a plus on OLED, but I have noticed more and more that while it's a cool addition to the presentation, it does not define it. When you have a projector that has solid black and color reproduction, in addition to sharp resolution, it gives OLED a run for its money from an overall presentation standpoint, in my opinion. And last point, I have only had a projector for a few months and I love it so much, I am now planning to go to a 2.35 AT screen in the near future. The OLED is still our go to for watching TV and, for me, 4K's that have very good HDR, but I will be moving most of my movie watching to the projector.

[@nothingtoseehere93]

Protectors win ONLY on size. That’s it. I have a 160” screen with an nz7 plus madvr envy and an 75” s90c, and the oled is so much better it’s not even close. If you don’t have multiple rows, just sit closer and get an oled. It’s so much better you can’t even understand until you see it. Projectors only worth it for huge screen sizes or acoustic transparency which isn’t THAT common.

[@ChadAV69]

No. Projector can use AT screen. Projector image looks more natural and less fatiguing than TV. Projector is a lot easier to handle, install and repair.

[@AA-ws3vd]

Size is huge and speaker placement is underrated. I love our AT screen.

[@nin74]

Of course not. A TV cannot be a serious option over a projector.

[@bearclaw5115]

@@nin74 Unjustified snobbery.

[@bearclaw5115]

You're spot on. I came to the exact same conclusions.

[@whitecrowuk575]

I’m considering getting UST projector and 100” screen and 83” OLED. With OLED i can get 40 FOV and with 100” i can get 45. Advantage is i can have cinematic experience even with ambient light on OLED whilst UST even with ALR requires total darkness for best contrast. The only question is if jump from 40 to 45 FOV is where immersive starts or not.

[@paulc5389]

For bouncing wouldn't 2 side speakers acting as phantom centre but aimed at the TV work better as long as it's processed well to avoid comb filtering? That way the vertical angle the sound is arriving at wouldn't change seat to seat. That said the only reason I'd go TV for a large screen is to go oled and that's impossible as it tops out at 97 inches. On smaller TVs (i.e. all of them except TCLs 115 inch one) having the centre below the TV angled up is less of an issue as it's higher up. The main reason I see people prefer TVs is they don't have dedicated spaces so also need a solution that works well in daylight. However, I'd argue a bright UST with a Fresnel screen is the better option as TVs in daylight turn into giant mirrors. But then the same centre challenges still exist. A massive downside of large TVs especially oleds people often overlook is heat. I'm in a small room so I do use an oled and the room gets very hot and stuffy very quickly. I can't even begin to imagine how much heat a 97" puts out.

[@erod9088]

There is nothing cinematic about TVs. They're for sports and American Idol. Movies need screens and projectors. TVs are far too bright for darkened theater rooms. Plus they generate intense heat and they don't fit through the door if they're the size they need to be.

[@kaelmedia8693]

Agree with most. But it doesnt Need to generate a lot of heat and having too much brightness is like making it a problem if you have too much headroom in regards to bass. Projectors aren’t going anywhere.

[@SwirlingDragonMist]

Tv is still ahead of projectors in terms of higher frame rates for smooth gaming. OLED black levels also un-matched.

[@bearclaw5115]

Intense heat? Is that a joke? Projectors use the same wattages if not more anyway.

[@erod9088]

@@bearclaw5115 The big TVs cook a room big time. Do some research. A 150- to 170-inch TV, which is what projector screens are these days, would be a blow torch and would weigh a ton.

[@erod9088]

@@SwirlingDragonMist Projectors are for cinema, not for playing games.

[@johnlim7720]

You're assuming that people who use projectors are using AT screens. But for me I think a lot still use the non-AT screens so the center speaker is still at the bottom of the screen similar to what one would do with a TV setup. In my own case I still use a non-AT screen since I have a diecast toy collection display case at the back of the screen. So when the screen rolls up it shows the display case.

[@shaolin95]

But there is also other that use scope screens which lets the center sit higher

[@johndaddabbo9383]

Matthew, center channel reflected off screen - what's governing the crossover point. 1 khz seems quite high. Why not say 120hz? Thanks.

[@gabemartinez1012]

Hello, to get the immersive feeling how big should my screen be if I seat 9 feet away?

[@PoesAcoustics]

To achieve a ~52 degree viewing angle you need a 120-125” diagonal screen.

[@bearclaw5115]

Former projector fan here but OLED just destroys projection set ups for me. I would only go back to projection if I thought I regularly was going to be entertaining others in my space. For a time I ran both technologies in the same space with the tv on a movable stand. When I switched back to the projector (4k hdr dlp) it felt like I was looking at cardboard. That said large OLEDs don't come cheap. They really need to get some larger fabs going to lower costs of the panels.

[@paulc5389]

I'd argue large oleds don't exist by projector standards. Whilst a 97" oled is an amazing picture it's still only 97". For a dedicated space oled isn't an option unless it's only for a couple of seats in a small room. So the real question is what's better.. mini led or projector. And with mini led you're basically saying the TCL 115" only vs a high end projector at a similar price point. Obviously micro led exists but not everyone is a millionaire.

[@shaolin95]

😂😂😂 clearly you never saw a high end projector on a completely controlled (light and reflectione) room My 85 OLED is only used for regular shows. For movies it pales in comparison to my 152 diag scope screen setup

[@e4superfly]

still a crap image compared to my oled ​@shaolin95

[@matthewscorner5722]

I want a projector but currently where I am cost has me using a large tv. I’d want to do the projector right acoustically transparent false wall etc I’m not just going to slap a 1000$ projector and a 1000$ screen on the wall if I ever get to do it.

[@bearclaw5115]

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the possible. Thousand dollar projectors look pretty good these days.

[@paulc5389]

You can get projectors and screens around 120" for the same price as large TVs. If constrained by budget the bright Epsom LS and a DIY Spandex screen is very affordable. And off the shelf screens are still affordable at around 120".

[@michael-4k4000]

Why not try a phantom center, using the two front channels?

[@shaolin95]

Not that good and only works for the mlp

[@nin74]

A TV will never ever be home theater, just like a car will never be a motorcycle. The point with a home theater is to reproduce the theater experience and that have been the same for 120+ years, a projected image on a screen.

[@e4superfly]

projectors look like ass compared to my oled

[@nin74]

@@e4superfly OLED is still not a home theater.

[@chebrubin]

LOL you guys know nothing. A 115" Mini LED is brighter than the most expensive Sony or Christie projector. You will need sun glasses. Unless you are doing 200". The day of 100 to 120" front projectors is over. Period.

[@paulc5389]

Why do I want to watch a movie wearing sunglasses? Mini led is horrible to watch. Sure it has benefits but it also has downsides and it's cons out way it's pros to a lot of people as discussed in this video. If LG want to make a 120" oled for less than 10 grand that would be a different story. But that's not happening anytime soon.

[@shaolin95]

115" is a joke compared to a 150 screen plus scope is THE format for movies

[@chebrubin]

@shaolin95 the vast majority of the ultra high net worth want livable spaces. In wall bedlayer and heights. Front left center and right can be conventional speakers or RBH smaller AMT tweeter speaker modules.