HD Audio versus the audio already on DVDs is not as wildy different as some might want to mythically argue. Most people already have at LEAST a 5.1 receiver. That's good enough. My point was, to invest in the video first, then get the super duper HD audio supreme with sour cream 10.1 receivers with HDMI 1.5 or whatever the fuck it is these days.

You'd be willing to sacrifice screen size and resolution in favor of sound? Well, you might as well throw HD out the window, my friend. Because HD on a 26" or even a 32" is basically hopeless and just plain retarded. If you want to justify the expense of buying an HD disc just because it has "lossless" audio so you can view it on your 26" HDTV, then some you might want re-think HD altogether.

Your video and audio should be proportionate. I can't imagine some of you would be elated and excited at having 7.1 surround, while watching an action movie on a 20" television. You might as well just listen to the soundtrack, and have the tv turned off.

My point is simply that most of us already have a DD 5.1 receiver, and for HDTV viewing, this is INITIALLY just fine. It is the HDTV you want to dedicate more money to at first because you're probably not going to buy another one anytime soon. Then, purchase the upgrade receiver sound system later and speakers along the way. For most, the HD "pop" is going to be the VIDEO and not the audio. If I was wrong, you'd have marketing about how great the audio was, and no mention of video. But as we know, it's the just opposite. Of course, Universal has their little "the sound of perfect" on their HD cases, but I have yet to hear the sound of perfect. Even in HD.

You're saying to potential HD owners, to get a smaller size HDTV so they can afford a higher-priced sound system. That's insane. And that's why there are 26" HDTVs selling, because people are being told similar myths about HD. Then when the consumer gets home and inserts the HD movie and watches it, they are not enthusiastic and then post on these types of forums, why HD looks no better than their DVD collection.

Ideally, in an ideal world where money is easy to attain and spend, a person could have a 50" or even a 65" HDTV and a sound system which costs several times more. However, let's be realistic here and not present the theoretical arguments of a purist who has a large wallet. Because this isn't the typical HD consumer.

I say let the HD consumer get the best HDTV they can afford. Then start working on the audio upgrades in the future. HD is certainly about better-sounding audio, but the video quality, is foremost. And it is the video quality and presentation of that video quality, which will gain consumer momentum.

---

Spiky, you apparently have a great sound system, but you're in the minority. Most won't spend as much as you have on an audio system.

^ I guess you missed the last line of my post.

Minimum: $400 (32" LCD), $120 HTiB, $100 HD-DVD Player, so $620.

Yours, I'd recommend: $850 (Good HD projector), $20 screen (+$60 for good frame, you build), $200 HTiB, PS3 ($350 - $400) is around $1500 for a really nice setup, but hardly a minimum.

Good call Rich, although your prices seem a bit low (could be something to do with me being in Canada).

Why do people keep saying things like HD is "useless" on a small screen?!?!?! That is so ludicrous. Yes, of course, the bigger the screen, the greater the benefit, but there is a WORLD of difference between a CRT TV and and HDTV, and between SD broadcasts and HD broadcast regardless of the screen size. You can fairly say that the value increases a great deal as the screen size increases, but even at 26"-30", the difference between watching SD prograaming on a 27" CRT TV and watching 720p programming on a 26" HDTV is night and day to me.

^There are several reasons for saying that HD on smaller screens is often not a dramatic improvement, two of which are: viewing distance and upscaling.

• Viewing Distance. If you sit more than seven feet from a 26 inch screen (as a lot of people do when "just watching TV") you will see essentially no benefit from 720p versus 480p. At five feet the full benefit of 720p is visible; perhaps you are sitting this close to your screen. For more on this, check out this chart.

• Upscaling. SD DVDs upscaled on a 720p screen can look pretty good, especially if the viewing distance is marginal. The improvement in going to full HD (BD or HD DVD) is less dramatic. Comparing a SD TV broadcast to HD is a much bigger jump in PQ than well-upscaled DVDs to HD. The difference between upscaled DVDs to HD discs becomes more noticeable as one goes to larger screen sizes (or a much closer viewing distance) and to 1080p screen resolution.


None of this is saying that there is no difference between SD and HD, even on smaller screens. As you have seen, there is, under appropriate viewing conditions. But remember, most of us have DVD collections so the real issue is how much improvement is there between upscaled SD DVDs and HD discs. On small screens at a longer viewing distances: not so much.

Hmm. I have a 60" in my apartment, and I think it is too small. To each his own.

Your apartment is just too big.

I'm a deal hunter, heh heh.

I have a small house. My media room is about 8x10. My HDTV, Sony 32" Bravia, is perfect for the size room. My old 42" Gateway plasma was sold for $500 to pay for half of my Sony. I also have the Sony BDP300 ($400). I still have to get a sound system but I'm in no hurry. So far I have about 35 Blu-ray movies and already have about 2000 DVDs in my library. One reason why I like the smaller 32" TV is because I like to move things around from time to time and found 42" not worth it. Some people need the big big TV but I remember when having a 20" TV was a big thing.

I also have a 27" HDTV (Walmart ilo @ $400) that I use as my computer monitor in another small bedroom. Since they are so cheap I'm thinking of getting a HD player also (currently have a upcoverting DVD player). My MacPro audio system is an old Bose Companion 3 set. It seems to me I watch more videos on my 27" than my 32".

The end result:
Media room
Sony 32" Bravia $1000 - $500 (sold old Plasma) = $500
Sony BDP300 $400
No sound system at this time

Computer room
ilo 27" HDTV $400
HD-A2 $100
Bose Companion 3 (old set) $200

If I were starting from scratch, I'd do the 40GB PS3 and the TV, whatever suits your budget and taste. Then I'd shop the used market for a good pair of used bookshelf speakers -- classic, full-range acoustic suspension 2-cubic-footers from the 80s or earlier -- and a basic stereo receiver.

Yes, you give up surround. But you will actually hear the sounds on the program material they way they are actually supposed to sound. Who cares if the sound of a helicopter goes behind you if it sounds like a Cuisinart? You can't make the fidelity of a system higher by adding more crappy speakers to it.

You can upgrade to a good surround sound system (for which the entry level for high-fidelity sound is more like $1k than $400) down the road.

This was my big HD upgrade year -- 42" Aquos, PS3, and HD-A2. But I'm still using a 6-year old AVR (a Technics SA-DX1050 that was supposed to be temporary, but has actually been quite satisfactory), and speakers that are from 5 to 20 years old (all Henry Kloss-designed Cambridge Soundworks speakers that are well timbre-matched).

So this year it was $1800, added to equipment that would cost maybe $2000 for today's equivalents.

If you're going the projector route I suggest the Mitsubishi 4900U 1080p Projector. You can currently score one at ProjectorPeople.com for $1899 minus a $500 mail-in rebate = $1399 ... I just upgraded from a 720p projector and, believe me, you're going to want that extra resolution! If not now, you're going to want it a year from now and it really makes a difference with the screen size you can get from a decent projector.