Is high definition necessary for home theater?
by Matt Burns 
posted Nov 26th 2005 at 7:37PM
This time of year makes people stand up and question the norm. For example: does Christmas require presents to be a happy Christmas? That's a tough question and there is no way I can answer that you for you but I have another question that I am asked a lot. "Is high definition necessary for a home theater?"
Let's start by defining what a "home theater" is. This can vary greatly from person to person but in general is a room that is created to simulate a theater experience by way of sound and picture. There may be dedicated seating on a raised platform or simply a couch to lounge on. This may be a room that was created with just the theater in mind or perhaps, this is a living room that plays double duty.
We all know high definition is the best picture you can get, but is it necessary for a theater?
[my answer after the jump]
No, high-def is not a requirement for a home theater. In fact, I do not
believe that it is necessary at all. The theater experience is created
by, yes a big screen, but moreover the sound. *ducks to avoid flying
objects* A nice picture is necessary but does that mean the nice
picture has to be high definition. None of what you see at the theater
is not HD but rather mostly a digital picture. A nice TV, or projector,
that can produce a good 480p is all a person needs to create a great
theater experience. Let me explain a little more.
A picture only stimulates your eyes. There is not much that your eyes have not seen and does not stimulate them like sound can affect your ears. It is the sound that makes the theater come alive. The sound will make you "feel" the chopper blades whirling above and it is the sound that will create the suspense. The sound from the movie will stay with you longer then anything you have seen will. Take Star Wars for example. Can you still hear the metallic cling of the blaster rifles or the way R2-D2 chipped and chirped? Hitchcock is another great example as his movies were made when color was an after thought, but the effects of sound made his movies a masterpiece.
There is a great deal of detail that normal TV speakers cannot produce and it is a shame that people drop thousands of dollars on a TV only to forget the sound. The picture is great to have, do not get me wrong, but if I had to choose between getting a $3,000 TV or a $500 TV with a $2,500 sound system, I would choose the later every time. The picture above is my main home theater that does not feature a high-def set but rather a very nice set of Velodyne speakers paired with a big Onkyo receiver. This creates a great theater experience for my family.
Is high-def nice to have, yes. Would I choose it over high quality sound in a home theater, no.
That's just me though. I was raised listening to LPs as a past time so other people might view this differently. What do you think? Is HD necessary for a home theater?
A picture only stimulates your eyes. There is not much that your eyes have not seen and does not stimulate them like sound can affect your ears. It is the sound that makes the theater come alive. The sound will make you "feel" the chopper blades whirling above and it is the sound that will create the suspense. The sound from the movie will stay with you longer then anything you have seen will. Take Star Wars for example. Can you still hear the metallic cling of the blaster rifles or the way R2-D2 chipped and chirped? Hitchcock is another great example as his movies were made when color was an after thought, but the effects of sound made his movies a masterpiece.
There is a great deal of detail that normal TV speakers cannot produce and it is a shame that people drop thousands of dollars on a TV only to forget the sound. The picture is great to have, do not get me wrong, but if I had to choose between getting a $3,000 TV or a $500 TV with a $2,500 sound system, I would choose the later every time. The picture above is my main home theater that does not feature a high-def set but rather a very nice set of Velodyne speakers paired with a big Onkyo receiver. This creates a great theater experience for my family.
Is high-def nice to have, yes. Would I choose it over high quality sound in a home theater, no.
That's just me though. I was raised listening to LPs as a past time so other people might view this differently. What do you think? Is HD necessary for a home theater?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
HDjanitor @ Nov 26th 2005 9:56PM
Yes, the sound is what involves you in the movie. You have to have WIDESCREEN, though. Widescreen and theater go hand in hand. So, if you're going to use your home theater to watch TV shows and sports, they are only available in widescreen on HD feed, then HD is must, in my opinion. But, if the main purpose is for movies, HD is not necessary... Maybe in 5-10 years when High-Def DVDs are available everywhere.
Uchendu Nwachukwu @ Nov 27th 2005 11:41AM
I agree about the widescreen. I think widescreen is almost as important as sound, simply because DVDs are meant to be viewed in widescreen and black bars on a 4:3 screen are distracting to me.
To me, it MUST have good sound and it MUST be widescreen. Beyond that, I'm happy.
Having said that, it's HD or bust with my next TV.
Shawn @ Nov 27th 2005 2:12AM
Well the funny thing is: I am in the SMALL crowd of not having a surround sound set up. I have my DLP, XBox, JSI DVD upconverter on the way, and Moxi DVR. No SSS (Surround Sound System)
Am I missing out? Yes I am but do I feel I need it when I want other HDTV's for the rest of the house, No.
Also, the SSS does complete the HT experience, yes I believe in that whole heartedly but they both have to be there. I have had two roommates that had SSS with my setup and I miss it tremendously but have not thought that I need it just yet (over 6 months w/o)
So I will respectfully dissagree (to a point) and say that you need both. My $.02. ;)
Stealth43 @ Nov 27th 2005 11:22AM
umm, since I cant find an email address for HDBeat (!!!) I'll post this find here.
I was browsing Toshiba's site, and found a rather large error. http://www.tacp.toshiba.com/televisions/rearprojection.asp
The top tv is 51 in, and goes for $2099, while the second is 57 in, and goes for $1799. I suspect those sould be reversed. Oh well. If anyone can pass this along to the editors, please do
Stealth43
Ray Morris @ Nov 27th 2005 7:04AM
Sound is definatly important. Feeling explosions, crashes and even the heavy-bass music does add more than the visuals. I merely have (for now) sound coming out of my stereo reciever with only two speakers (15" woofers, 8" midrange and tweeters) and that output shakes the house plenty. With the right projector (we have a Canon SX50) a standard DVD will generate a Movie Theatre quality image (a unanimous observation by all who stop in). You don't need high definition at all, though it adds slightly, I'm sure.
"Hitchcock is another great example as his movies were made when color was an after thought, but the effects of sound made his movies a masterpiece."
Excellent example; "Lifeboat". Nearly the whole movie, the actors are sitting in a lifeboat doing nothing but talking. But what your hearing them say is what is captivating and captivating it is! Black & White image, no computer effects, no scenic backdrop (most of the movie could have been, and I believe was, filmed merely in a large swimming pool). Another example, an original "Star Trek" episode "The Empath". Kirk, Spock, McCoy and a female actor (the Empath) in a totaly darkened studio. Four people, dialog, black backdrop, not much else, yet it is very memorable and entertaining.
Gliztly eye-candy is nice, but even the three recent "Star Wars" films don't measure up to the older three with Luke Skywalker, Hans Solo and Princess Lea. Their 'snappy' interactions add character, 'fun' and interest, the newer trilogy just does not have at all!
Do a 'search' on UMD sales. They are, surprisingly, selling extremely well. The 'low-rez' choice. People in general aren't after the high quality image, and UMD is the proof! HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will be merely another choice as Laserdiscs was years ago. I expect it will never dominate the standard DVD market, but rather be, like UMD, another incidental option.
freestufftimes.com @ Nov 27th 2005 12:48PM
Its not necessary at this point, but I think it makes the experience that much better. I think more people will realize that, but that process is going to be a slow one.
LB @ Nov 28th 2005 2:52PM
Yes, it is indeed the sound that makes the experience a memorable one. If money were readily available the HD would surely be great, but the sound system is a must.
Home Theater Dude @ Nov 28th 2005 4:15PM
HD required for HT? Absolutely not.
However, for me, I and think anyone else who's experienced the immersion of a front projection home theater, the video is just as important as the audio.
Let me preface what I'm saying by admitting I've got a *lot* more money in my audio than my video. But the video is what gets me excited.
When I'm sitting and watching my 8 foot screen, in a mostly darkened room, with my surround sound pumping, I am lost in the experience.
At about 12 feet from the screen, my field of vision is filled with the video. The edges of the screen are just about in my periphery.
At times, I find myself looking around the screen to follow the video. On a traditionally smaller set, I have to constantly focus on the set's display area.
An 8' screen coupled with a properly set up 5.1 system, I just get totally lost in it. I have actually had people leave during suspense films due to being too drawn in. (Only once, but it did happen. Maybe I just had the volume too high? heh)
When I flip on the 32" CRT, with the same sound system, it just doesn't come close. Not even. But that's me, and after 2 years with front projection, I'm sure I'm spoiled.
All that said, for a proper HT experience, I would agree with the comments above, that you definitely would want a widescreen - as big as you can have. Then surround sound and good bass. (not booming, but accurate)
As for HD, if you mainly watch DVDs and or SD/ED cable tv/satellite, an HDTV is a waste of tech.
You need good source material for HD to be worth the money. OTA local, cable or satellite HD broadcasts, upconverting DVD players, and HT gaming can make the expense worth it.
If I were on a $3k budget, I'd spend 1-1.5 on a front projector (won't be hd in this range, not just yet) and the rest on audio.