Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What an $18,000 Home Theater Looks Like

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the i'll-take-two dept.

Media 107

kgagne writes "Computerworld has a blog with video about an $18,000 home theater system that Intel set up at Storage Networking World in order to promote their new home server system. But what's really cool about this set up is that the server was connected to a 24" iMac, an Apple TV, an Xbox 360, a Wii, an iPod Touch, a Nokia N810 mobile Internet tablet, various cameras and a 15" wireless digital picture frame. The server was streaming all the various feeds to a top-of-the-line Pioneer Elite 50" plasma TV. The Intel reps said the high-definition movie downloads, which could be browsed through a menu, were as high quality as those from a Pioneer Elite Blu-ray player they had set up."

cancel ×

107 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041648)

A 103+ inch plasma, not that 50 inch. Honestly, after seeing a 103 inch plasma regularly, a 50 inch plasma seems tiny. :p

Other than that, I approve, nice setup.

Re:All they need is... (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041714)

Other than that, I approve, nice setup.

How about a subwoofer? Or surround sound? Seriously, that setup and only stereo speakers. I can barely tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, but I sure as hell can tell the difference between 2.0 and 5.1

Re:All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041782)

Good point, I didn't notice that. Also, the 100+ inch plasma would knock the price up to around $100,000 or so instead of $18,000.

Re:All they need is... (3, Insightful)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041938)

The large plasma may get the best picture quality possible, the 50" is probably an incredibly fine unit too. One can get big picture on a lower budget with a projector. It's not for everyone, but a projector that's half the cost of that Kuro can throw a 150" image in full 1080p, with a picture quality that's good enough that I really don't care that I don't have a plasma.

I'd do away with the Monster products (speakers and "voltage stabilizers") in that list too. I just don't like seeing money spent on snake oil manufacturers.

Re:All they need is... (4, Insightful)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042002)

I've got a 50" in my apartment, parents own one of the 103" Panasonic units... It's fairly insane and in my opinion a total waste of money, but then again, he can afford it.

Also, the Monster power filters are actually very good units, I've taken a multimeter to them and done some tests. However, everything else that comes out of that company is total snake oil.

Anyone who buys a $150 AES/ABU cable when any $5 XLR cable will do the job perfectly fine is an idiot. Gold plated connectors? Sorry bud, but your connectors on your gear are most likely tin or copper, and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity... Gotta love the things "audiophiles" do that electrical/audio engineers laugh at. :p

Side note, since I'm a guitarist, I also think tube amps are entirely overrated, I can do just about anything with my Vetta that someone can do with (x brand here) tube amp.

Also, good point on the projector, the only problem is during daytime if you have windows open you can't really see much, but aside from that it is a cheaper alternative that's equally good.

Re:All they need is... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042674)

"and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity" no it doesn't. It doesn't add any either.
IN order to lower it, it would have to be worse then the actual connection loss.

Projectors are not as good. I was looking at the difference just last weak end. The plasma was crisper, and the details were sharper.

"the Monster power filters are actually very good units, "
that may be true, I;ll take your word for it, but are they better then other companies products? Personally, because of there snake oil marketing I would avoid even their good products.
FYI, A scope would be better.

In some scenes, looking at the plasma was like looking out your front window at the action.
Simply awesome.
Which isn't to deride projectors, it was certianly better then my current TV, but side by side plasma was jaw dropping.

Re:All they need is... (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042900)

"and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity" no it doesn't. It doesn't add any either.
The point of gold plating is mostly corrosion. In most cases it's a non-issue.

Projectors are not as good. I was looking at the difference just last weak end. The plasma was crisper, and the details were sharper.
I saw one of those 100" plasma units, and while it's an impressive display, I thought a projector image was close enough in favourable lighting conditions. Also the 90.000 price tag scared me off.

the Monster power filters are actually very good units, " that may be true, I;ll take your word for it, but are they better then other companies products?
Do you need power filters in the first place? Maybe to protect your equipment against surges or brownouts, yes, but does it really affect the sound quality that much to warrant spending 4 figures on it?

Re:All they need is... (1)

Enleth (947766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044706)

"and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity" no it doesn't. It doesn't add any either.


The point of gold plating is mostly corrosion. In most cases it's a non-issue.
Well, it is an issue. The electronegativity difference between gold and tin is 0.58, between gold and copper about 0.64. That's enough to form a parasitic cell, given enough humidity, corroding the tin or copper side of the connection. And since it's usually the $100-bazillion plasma side, not the cable side, well, you're screwed. By the very problem a gold cable was meant to prevent, according to the sales rep who insisted on buying them. Well, yeah, the cable is fine, because gold is corrosion-resistant, but that's not the point, is it?

Re:All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042944)

I personally prefer plasmas for the exact reason you specified. And yea, a scope would be better. Once I can afford a good one I'll give it a go. :p

My reason for using the power filter is for guitar equipment and studio monitoring/recording, it does a great job of killing out any 60 Hz hum that becomes pretty apparent with high gain circuits. For a home theater, meh.

Re:All they need is... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044390)

I;ll take your word for it, but are they better then other companies products?

Dickface,
"then" denotes a reference of time, "than" can be used for comparisons.

LEARN ENGLISH YOU PIECE OF HUMAN FILTH.

Re:All they need is... (1)

jgoemat (565882) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044696)

"and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity" no it doesn't. It doesn't add any either. IN order to lower it, it would have to be worse then the actual connection loss.
It doesn't add conductivity naturally, but it also doesn't corrode like many metals do in an oxygen atmosphere.

Re:All they need is... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045272)

Which isn't to deride projectors, ... but side by side plasma was jaw dropping.

If picture quality was your only consideration, then, the plasma is definitely superior. But when you figure in the cost, installation considerations, portability, I think that generally sways the consideration to a front projector.

Re:All they need is... (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23046096)

The gold actually will change conductivity. It has a slightly lower conductivity than copper. As another poster points out, the reason gold is used is because it doesn't generate a high-resistivity oxide on its surface and ultimately degrade the electrical connection.

For those commenting about silver, it definitely does increase conductivity and is frequently plated on radio frequency conductors because at high frequencies, most of the current flows on and near the surface of the conductors. A silver plating really helps lower impedance.

However, on connectors, silver also reacts with air to form silver sulfides that can degrade the connection.

For most purposes, plain old copper is a fine connector material. For high-reliability connections, or especially in corrosive environments, look to gold plating.

Re:All they need is... (1)

inviolet (797804) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042966)

Also, the Monster power filters are actually very good units, I've taken a multimeter to them and done some tests. However, everything else that comes out of that company is total snake oil.

What qualities of a power filter can be assessed with a multimeter?

A scope, maybe. But a multimeter?

Re:All they need is... (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043046)

Not just a scope but a way to inject noise and spikes into either side of the filter to see how it does at filtering what's coming in as well as what's leaking out.

With a multimeter, I think about all you can say is that input is connected to output by measuring continuity. Regular needle movements have a fair amount of damping just by inertia of the needle and digital meters have damping by the nature of how they do the measurements.

I've also seen far too many head to head reviews that show most house brand (i.e. cheap) cables are just as good at getting the signal from A to B as Monster Cables to bother with ever buying them. I hope anyone interested searches for the reviews themselves.

It unfortunately seems that all Monster does is sell to the people who think that paying their premium negates having to make any kind of judgement call or do any research when buying A/V cables - or the people who can't wait to brag about how much money they spent (i.e. threw away) on their home theater system.

Those two groups alone, especially at the profit margins Monster must have, probably keep the execs in clover, on boats in the Bahamas, drinking old, old scotch, and lighting their cigars with $100 dollar bills.

I don't choose to participate.

Re:All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043082)

There's only one place I use more expensive (Planet Waves) cables is from my guitar to my guitar amp.

Also see above post about me having a retard moment with the whole multimeter thing. ;P

Re:All they need is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23043112)

Holy grammar failure, batman. I meant to type "The only place..."

Re:All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043074)

Yea, retard moment on my part. Already been pointed out. :p

Re:All they need is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044148)

Gold plated connectors? Sorry bud, but your connectors on your gear are most likely tin or copper, and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity... Gotta love the things "audiophiles" do that electrical/audio engineers laugh at. :p

Gold isn't used for its conductivity, it is used for its resistance to corrosion.

Chemist laugh at audiophiles, electrical and audio engineers! :)

Re:All they need is... (1)

NosTROLLdamus (979044) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044324)

Line 6... haha oh wow...

Re:All they need is... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045208)

Also, good point on the projector, the only problem is during daytime if you have windows open you can't really see much, but aside from that it is a cheaper alternative that's equally good.

Which is why I said it's not for everyone. But a good home theater room has to have good light control anyway. You don't want glare being reflected from the screen if you have a plasma.

Re:All they need is... (1)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045210)

Gold plated connectors? Sorry bud, but your connectors on your gear are most likely tin or copper, and the gold plating actually decreases conductivity...
Gold is used for two reasons.
1. Corrosion resistance. Not an issue for the first few years, but I've seen older plugs corrode significantly.
2. Gold is soft, which means it will deform around e.g. scratches on the connector it mates to. This means the contact area is larger than on non-plated connectors, reducing resistance. So even when the mating connector isn't goldplated, it makes sense to use s goldplated connector.

Re:All they need is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042068)

"Voltage stabilizers" are just power conditioning equipment, and can be very useful. Though I would suggest making sure you need them (through measurement) before getting any. And I would suggest building them. I surely would not suggest Monster.

They're just power amplifiers attached to a 60Hz sine wave generator. They take in dirty power, shape it into clean power (by amplifying a purer 60Hz tone), and output that the amplified tone to drive your noise susceptible equipment.

Re:All they need is... (3, Interesting)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042422)

I think one of the coolest voltage stabilization/emergency power backup systems I've seen is at the Terremark building in downtown Miami.

Part 1: Excessively huge electric motor attached to power grid.
Part 2: 5 ton concrete disc attached to motor spinning at exactly 60 rotations/second.
Part 3: Generator attached to 5 ton concrete disc that powers the building.

There are 8 generators around it, uniformly spaced. At any given time two of them are operating in sync with the commercial grid and also powering the electric motor. If the power goes out, the rest of the generators kick on and take over the electric motor within minutes, long before the disc loses any momentum. As soon as power comes back on, all of the generators are cut from the motor and two new standby generators are picked and synced up with the grid.

Granted, almost all of the traffic to South America is routed through this building, so it's gotta be pretty resilient. It also has if I recall a 20 ton concrete roof to prevent any hurricane problems.

Re:All they need is... (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042868)

Meh... go for a 1080p projector. 10 times cheaper with better display.

Re:All they need is... (1)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043302)

I have a 42" 1080p that I watch from about 3m away, (LG 42LB5D) and I can tell you that there's a pretty big difference between 720p and 1080p images. Very noticeable.

There's two main factors in that, though... the size of the screen, and how far away I am. The subjective picture quality boils down to the relative size of the pixels on screen, and there's exactly two solutions: sit further away from the TV, or get a higher resolution display.

I'm not saying that a decent sound setup is a waste of money. I've got a 5.1 setup on mine. But I am going to point out that a lot of what you'll be watching is still going to be in plain old 2.0 Stereo, whereas you can pick up 1080i/p on *broadcast* over-the-air TV. I'm watching the Ottawa/Pittsburgh game 2 as I type this, and it looks *way* better on the OTA HD even than it does on the satellite TV.

Re:All they need is... (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042170)

There's a local custom home theater company that *starts* at $25,000, anything less isn't worth their time.

Re:All they need is... (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042374)

We've got one of those around here... They managed to use all of the HDMI ports on the 103 incher, and wanted $1000 to hook up a friggin Wii. That was a "No thanks, we'll just play on a different TV" moment.

Re:All they need is... (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045224)


You can't even buy a remote from this company unless you're a customer. This company usually does the install when the house is being built. It was $525,000 for the theater room on the biggest and most expensive projectthey'd ever done. It looked like a victorian era theater. The remote system was 10k. They had a satellite 'cable company in a box' system as well that did 40 independent channels. The list goes on and on.

Just insane.

I was there to do warranty work on one TV. Long time ago.

Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please? (0, Flamebait)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041680)

Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV"? Seriously, if I won this $18K rig as a prize, that's the piece I'd leave unopened on the curb. (I'd eBay the iMac and use the cash to buy something cooler too.)

Re:Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041742)

(I'd eBay the iMac and use the cash to buy something cooler too.)
Impossible, because there is NOTHING cooler.

Did you see the new commercial with the PC doing yoga, his urdhva mukha svanasana was total rubbish! Mac wins again.

Re:Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please (1)

eviloverlordx (99809) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041816)

Impossible, because there is NOTHING cooler.

I really hadn't thought of the computer for blue-haired old ladies as cool, but whatever floats your boat.

Re:Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please (4, Funny)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041956)

Macs aren't just for blue-haired old ladies. Or for floating boats. They are also for a subset of things that PCs do!

Sadly, as my car only gets 15 mpg, I am not allowed by law to own a Mac. Oh well.

Re:Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please (2, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042698)

also: PC's do a subset of things that macs do.

I hope you weren't trying to make some point.

Re:Uh...can I get it without the "AppleTV", please (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042988)

You mean, for running OS X, Windows, and Linux applications, all in the same environment? Yes, a proper subset, that.

Selfish bastard (4, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041768)

These sorts of stories make me so mad. Why can't people spend this money on the starving people of Africa instead of blowing it on this nonsense?

Seriously folks, you could buy decent home theatre systems for lots of poor starving African children for the cost of this one system. Won't somebody think of the children?

Come steal our "jerbs"! (1)

mark_hill97 (897586) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042246)

Well if those lazy bastards in Africa would get off their asses and sell $18,000 systems to us greedy Americans then they would have plenty to eat now wouldn't they?

As a side benefit we would have another person to blame our failing economy on, Hooray!

Re:Selfish bastard (1)

Amphetam1ne (1042020) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043020)

Because the most likely outcome is that the African government will get the money instead of the people who need it and will spend it on their military instead of sorting out their starving and aids afflicted nation.

Tag story "gluttony" (1)

JonSimons (1026038) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044398)

I did.

Re:Selfish bastard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044612)

You'd probably be better off buying the people of Africa fruit trees or bamboo along with the rice, grain, flour, and vegetable oil. Imagine if you started from the coasts and worked your way inland planting successive lines of fruit-bearing, shade-providing trees, eventually criss-crossing the Sahara east to west, the continent might rejuvenate back into fertile land. Neem trees are also useful: lots of shade and the leaves contain a natural insect repellant.

Just think: with a grid of fruit trees planted across the continent of Africa, we could feed its starving people and still have enough food left over to feed the trolls.

$20k (5, Funny)

JBHarris (890771) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041846)

The tabulation comes up closer to $20k. From the article:

Here's a tabulation of the equipment:
(1) Pioneer 50" 1080p KURO Flat Panel HDTV: $5,000
(2) Series Pro Power AVS 2000 Automatic Voltage Stabilizers: $4,400
(2) Intel Entry Storage System SS4200-E home NAS servers: $700 (without disk drives)
(1) Pioneer BDP-95FD Blu-ray Disc player: $999
(1) 24" iMac: $2,249
(1) Apple TV: $329
(1) Xbox 360 console: $349
(1) Nintendo Wii console: $250
(1) Apple iPod Touch: $399
(1) Nokia N810 Mobile Internet Tablet: $500
(1) Spectrum Digital 15" wireless photo frame: $357
(1) Pioneer Elite VSX 94TXH AV Receiver: $1,800
(2) Monster THX Tower Speakers 200: $1,600
Total price: $18,932
That is without drives in the server, and without any games or movies or anything else that makes the home theater worth something.

Personally, I'd rather have the $400 Home Theater in a Box from Circuit City and $17,600 in cash in a briefcase sitting in front of it...That will certainly impress your friends.

Brad

Re:$20k (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042006)

Funny thing.. Why buy a $1800 reciever with 7.1 surround, when you only buy 2 speakers?

Re:$20k (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042618)

Probably didnt want to waste money on those rip-off Monster audio cables.

Re:$20k (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043108)

$20K isn't so ridiculous though. It's not rare for people to buy a $38K car when an $18K car would work just as well.

Re:$20k (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044016)

What, no Monstercable to bump the cost up to $25K?

$2k, MythTV + Projector. (1, Insightful)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044774)

Why bother with the fancy TV and all that other stuff when all you need is a projector and a few commodity PCs with good software like MythTV? The separation between front and back ends makes it possible to play your media on anything, including a picture frame or PDA. A nice projector should give you a large, theater quality image. Is there something besides "trusted path" and other digital restrictions that I'm missing here?

hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater... (2, Insightful)

Fallen Kell (165468) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041890)

I mean, I have $8k in speakers/subs alone and that doesn't include the $2500 in amps.

Heck, I think I have over $21k in my setup, and that is just on the speakers, TV, stand, audio rack, DVD player, audio/video pre-processor, amplifiers, HTPC/DVR, and data server. Now grant it I have something like 7TB of storage now in that setup, and over 3000W of speaker/subs, but I don't even have close to my dream theater, which includes at least 2 rows of seating, and room audio treatments...

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (4, Funny)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042044)

Pshh what a hobo. I have over $300,000,000 in MY setup, and that's just on the speakers, amplifiers, and TV stand made entirely out of platinum and marble-sized black diamonds. Now granTED I have someting like 25 Exabytes of storage now in that setup, and my speakers are powered by the spinning of the Milky Way's central black hole, I don't even have close to MY dream theater, which includes 3 dungeon floors guarded by dragons and ninjas, chests that appear out of thin air containing a map and a compass, a roller coaster built entirely out of carbon fiber Legos, a girlfriend, and a Maybach Exelero to drive around the spaces between my 3000 rows of seats....

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042804)

Really?

$300,000,000 and just one girlfriend? I mean that could buy a lot of expensive Spitzer-esque hookers. Although I hear the rates are cheaper in Montana [goldenfiddle.com] .

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044058)

Ever heard Steve Martin's 'Googlephonics' stand-up bit? Come to think of it, doesn't this use of the word, "Google" predate the search engine?

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044428)

Mod parent up!

Not only did parent point out grandparent's spoiled fucking asshole-ness, he corrected his shit-for-brains usage of "grant it". Hah! I love it!

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042156)

I thought it was a bit cheap too. I mean, I can't afford them, but there are plenty of stores I've been to with more than that in just a pair of speakers :

http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.htm [higherfi.com]

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042710)

OK, you win.
You're the biggest loser.

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042936)

pfft.. I don't see any Apple product in your setup. Doesn't count.

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044754)

over 3000W of speaker/subs

Can you break that down for me in terms of the power handling of each speaker and sub? I don't mean to offend, but that seems almost unbelievable to this HT newb.

Re:hmmm... $18k isn't that much for a Home Theater (1)

Ethan Allison (904983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045230)

Yeah, but is your system going to sell any... what are these guys selling again?

Just the theater? (3, Funny)

SparkleMotion88 (1013083) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041896)

Ripoff. These days you can get an entire home for $18,000.

Re:Just the theater? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042092)

These days you can get an entire home for $18,000.
On land that costs ten times that, right?

Re:Just the theater? (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043130)

Where in United States?

Re:Just the theater? (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043490)

Rural Iowa.

Wrecked tiny house on tiny lot far from everything.

Houston and surrounding area (1)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | more than 6 years ago | (#23046934)

I'm in Houston, so I checked HAR.com and looked up single-family detached homes for under $20K. I find 30 houses with their lots listed for sale at $18,000 or less. Remove the 6 error listings that show as priced for $1 and that leave 24 houses ranging from $7499 to $18000. Some are in depressed areas. Some are 50+ miles out of town or out in the middle of nowhere. Still, the fact is that it's possible.

Re:Just the theater? (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043998)

That's what my parents paid for their house.

In 1983.

$18,000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23041904)

$18,000, that's it? How boring is that. You can spend that much on high end speakers. Let me know when there's an article on $180,000 home theater system or at least one that looks like the bridge of the starship enterprise.

-AC 'cause I'm too lazy to log in

Re:$18,000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042386)

Yeah, but this one has APPLE PARTS!!! You cannot have a good home thaya-ter without a box of iPods for throwing at the screen when you get angry, and an AppleTV to use as a doorstop when you are carrying boxes of actual equipment around.

Re:$18,000? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042578)

not 'high-end', I think (at least in terms of price) :

http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.htm [higherfi.com]

I personally like these - not the most expensive, but, oh, soooo pretty :

http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/Platinum_Audio_Air_Pulse_3_.jpg [higherfi.com]

Is this speaker-porn?

Re:$18,000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042956)

Is this speaker-porn?

If it is, its the equivalent of massively fat women porn... those are ugly.

I guess $18k still doesn't buy (2, Funny)

joeflies (529536) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041910)

"taste". Maybe geeking out is great fun for personal use, but the family probably doesn't want the front room looking like a NASA control center.

Re:I guess $18k still doesn't buy (2, Funny)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042738)

Get a new family!
My family would totally dig the front room looking like a NASA control center.
Unfortunately They would expect it to actually control spaceship, and it wouldn't do that..well wait a minute, if I just ...

Wasteful spending... (1)

zegota (1105649) | more than 6 years ago | (#23041924)

$1000 for a Blu-Ray player? Pick up a PS3 for $399. $400 on an iPod? Go get a friggin $50-$99 MP3 player.

I'm not sure what that $4000 power supply thing is -- it probably serves a purpose, though it doesn't factor into my home theatre, so it can't be all that crucial. Anyone want to shed some light on it for me?

Re:Wasteful spending... (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042032)

Its made by montster. So its a premium UPS, with about a 80% markup in price (or 800%). But if you ask someone at best buy, they'll insist it will make everything sound "high def" And it probably doesn't include the Monster premium titanium power cables to plug into the equipment.

Re:Wasteful spending... (1)

rob1980 (941751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042078)

I was just about to comment on that too. Anything Monster makes is likely to be found much cheaper and of comparable quality through another manufacturer, if it's even worth purchasing in the first place. Just because the rig cost $18,000 doesn't mean it's worth $18,000.

Re:Wasteful spending... (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042810)

I was just about to comment on that too. Anything Monster makes is likely to be found much cheaper and of comparable quality through another manufacturer, if it's even worth purchasing in the first place
Monster has become the Bose of the 21st century. They sell decent gear but it is way overpriced... and Monster went one smarter by selling cables. The margins on those so-called high end power cables or their speaker cables must be unbelievable.

before this idiotic "if it costs less than $1000 it must be rubbish" high end hype, everyone was using thick, but otherwise ordinary copper wire to hook up their speakers. Including the audiophiles.

PS3? (2, Interesting)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042050)

So where's the PlayStation 3? It's even better than the Blu-Ray player they have listed, and besides that, why include the other consoles but leave out the PS3?

Bah (2, Interesting)

JMZero (449047) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042140)

I wouldn't call this a home theater - and I don't think it's intended to be one. It's a technology showcase / bunch of useless crap. Besides that, how could you call it a "theater" with such a tiny screen?

Here's how I'd spend $18000:

1. Epson Powerlite 1080UB (projector) = $3000
2. Pair of Martin Logan Quest front speakers = $10000
3. Decent amp = $2000
4. Random center/rear channel speakers = $800
5. PS3 = $400
6. Decent 100" 16:9 screen = $500
7. Random subwoofer = $400

Now you're set up to watch movies, play games, listen to music, whatever - and your friends won't laugh at your pitiful 50" plasma.

And if you don't have $18000, substitute in a few cheaper alternatives and you can do a very decent theater for $3000 and still have a setup people will like more than the one in this article.

Re:Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042898)

2. Pair of Martin Logan Quest front speakers = $10000
4. Random center/rear channel speakers = $800


You realize that with movies you want a really nice center channel speaker, right? Spending 10K on the FL and FR and then skimping on the center is a complete waste. Sure it'll sound great for music, but it'll suck (relatively speaking) for movies.

Re:Bah (2, Funny)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042908)

2. Pair of Martin Logan Quest front speakers = $10000
3. Decent amp = $2000
4. Random center/rear channel speakers = $800
As long as your center and surrounds don't match your mains, your movie listening experience is going to be sub-par. Any sound that pans from one speaker to another is going to sound weird because of the difference in timbre between the originating speaker and the destination speaker. For example, when a tank rolls across the screen it will sound like a real tank when it enters stage right, then turn into a little toy, mickey-mouse tank, as it traverses the screen and then exits stage left again as a real tank should. By the time it makes it around the room to the surround speakers, it might as well be a ricer car with a fartbox on the exhaust.

Re:Bah (1)

Froobly (206960) | more than 6 years ago | (#23044954)

Do you honestly expect that at $800, his surround speakers are going to be noticeably bad? The difference between a $100 speaker and a $1000, let alone a $5000 speaker is pretty subtle, and won't come across when you're listening to crunches and explosions. The front speakers are for listening to music, where you might actually be able to tell the difference.

Re:Bah (1)

thetartanavenger (1052920) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045660)

On their own, no they'll sound amazing. The difference between those and any other type of speaker is very noticable though as every speaker has a different warmth and style of sound to it. It may take an audiophile to notice it, but if you're spending 18k on a setup you're quite likely to be one..

You want preferably the same speakers all round, failing that the same type of driver in every speaker. If you're going to have several different types of speaker you need to put them in every channel to make sure that they have the same sound around the room.

Going beyond that you want arrays of speakers around the room. No one speaker plays one channel of audio, but instead the combination of adjacent channels to make it possible for sound to be coming from any specific location in the room, not just where the speakers are located. Then it becomes essential that the speakers are matched all round.

Re:Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23045876)

The Quest Speakers are at least 15 years old, their second hand value probably depends a lot on the condition of the stators, but I'd guess that even a pair with recently replaced stators should be at or below $3000. I bought a pair of matching surround speakers to upgrade to 7.1 just last week (ML Stylos) for about $900, but that included a pair of matching amplifiers. I use a much smaller model of ML speakers than the Quests for my front speakers, and I frequently have to check if stereo material isn't played back in a surround mode, since sound appears to be coming out of the center, so one can probably get away without a center until something from ML pops up on ebay, audiogon or whatever. I'd expect to pay less than $2000 for a matching center, again depending heavily on the condition.

Re:Bah (1)

JMZero (449047) | more than 6 years ago | (#23048944)

I see what you're saying - but in practice I don't find it's much of a problem (the setup I mention is pretty much the same as I have set up now, which is why my I mention old ML models rather than whatever they have going now.. I'm also using an LCD until I finish the dedicated room in my new house).

I guess I'm not really much of an audiophile when it comes to movies. As long as you have sufficient power, a subwoofer, and surround, I don't notice too much else.

Where I do notice quality is in music - and having 2 good speakers alone has, to this point, been enough for that to sound great. I guess in the future we'll probably see more quality music with more channels, and I guess then I might upgrade the other speakers.

Re:Bah (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042974)

Here's how I'd spend $18000:

1. Epson Powerlite 1080UB (projector) = $3000
2. Pair of Martin Logan Quest front speakers = $10000
3. Decent amp = $2000
4. Random center/rear channel speakers = $800
5. PS3 = $400
6. Decent 100" 16:9 screen = $500
7. Random subwoofer = $400

Overall not bad, but the front speakers are by any reasonable measure stupid overkill, IMO.

I'd cut the speakers down by half or even more, and free up at least $5-6000. And then use the funds to add a Wii, upgrade the PS3, and get accessories for both, add a mac mini (which can do everything appletv can do plus its a PC), and allocate a bit more to the center and rears. (Given its a 2000 amp, we've probably got 7.1...so I'd throw $1000 or so at the center and a few hundred at the 4 side/rear satellite speakers.)

And I think I'd still have money left over for a higher end programmable universal remote or something, maybe add some NAS to access from the mac.

Re: better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23044298)

Sharp XV-Z20000 1080p High Definition DLP Front Projector ($7k msrp, $5k if you haggle)
Pioneer THX Ultra2 certified 5.1+ channel amp (msrp $3k, about $2k if you look in the right places)
A pair of Velodyne ULD-18s (about $1k used, each -- used to be $3k each msrp back in the day)
Any decent 5ch set of sealed, acoustically matched speakers (budget $300 each; the pioneer receiver will make them totally flat)
Any decent 100" 16:9 screen with low to neutral gain (about $500)

That's $7k + $2k + 2*$1k + $1.5 + $0.5 = $13k.
Spend the remaining $5k on a pair of Magnepan MG 3.6 for stereo mode listening. Your neighbor with the $10k ML's will cry himself to sleep after he hears your maggies, and your neighbor with the $400 sub will have a heart attack when the velodynes fire up during ${RandomActionMovie}.

Funny error in video (2, Informative)

Technician (215283) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042222)

I just watched the video and laughed. The presenter needs to understand RAID before explaining how it works. Do you see the problem with the following points?

System will hold up to 4 1 Tetrabyte drive in a RAID array.
With 4 1 Tetra byte SATA drives it will store 4 Tetra bytes of data.
If a drive fails, it can be replaced without losing data as it will rebuild the lost drive automatically.

Hats of to Intel for that one. I wish my RAID could do that.

Re:Funny error in video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23042562)

It's a factually correct statement. Four 1tb drives in RAID configuration can in fact store near 4 tb of data.
AND
4 1 tb drives in RAID configuration can in fact rebuild a lost drive.

They just can't do both at the same time. ;)

I've been hanging around our marketing department a little too much I guess.

Re:Funny error in video (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043380)

Actually they can and do. Four 1 TB drives do store 4 TB of data in a RAID array. And they can also rebuild a lost drive.

The data is just duplicated.

And this is also qualified in that four 1 TB drives that store 4 TB of unique data total cannot rebuild a lost drive. It's not really a RAID array anyway unless the data is striped for speed by accessing the drives basically in parallel.

But four 1 TB drives that are raided otherwise can carry 4 TB of data, but it is duplicated in some way so that a lost drive can be rebuilt.

Re:Funny error in video (1)

hab136 (30884) | more than 6 years ago | (#23045680)

A standard RAID 5 array with 4 x 1 TB drives would hold 3 TB of user data, and 1 TB of parity. Still.. we don't count the ECC codes on regular drives as "storing data" despite the fact that it is in fact data; likewise the RAID array should be advertised as holding 3 TB of data if RAID 5.

$18,000? (5, Funny)

hee gozer (1261036) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042232)

Pfft, only 12 Euros, that's pocket money!

Late to the party? (1)

pdbaby (609052) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042272)

This is going to sound like flamebait, but from that video it looks kinda like someone at Intel's consumer division saw one of the NAS devices in their server room.

How to waste money on marketing hype 101... (1)

astonish (177831) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042330)

FFS $4400 on "Voltage stabalizer" and only $1600 on speakers!? FFS people if your gonna waste money don't do it on the boogie man. Spending almost 3 times as much on a power bar as you do on the A in the A/V...

[Penny-arcade comic about the power/voltage cooties would go here if their archives weren't down right now]

Speakers ... (0, Troll)

debrain (29228) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042364)

could use some boosting ... say, Martin Logans [martinlogan.com] .

Misleading (1)

greendoggg (667256) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042460)

It's not a home theater system. It is a whole bunch of devices that can all be fed by a server, that might be found throughout one's house. The point is to demo an expensive-for-what-you-get intel home server.

Wii? (2, Insightful)

aarku (151823) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042552)

Did I miss it, but how exactly is the Wii connecting to the server? I never saw any ability like that in my Wii, unless it's just going through the web browser.

Re:Wii? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042760)

I would guess wireless? that's how mine does it.

Pretty weak (1)

hudsonhawk (148194) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042620)

Why on earth would you spend 3x as much on power conditioning than you do on speakers? They made some very odd decisions; 1/3rd this much money will get you a home theater that trumps it in terms of quality (though not features).

Re:Pretty weak (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043690)

Why do they need "power conditioning" at all? Every unit specified, with the possible exception of the "Receiver"'s amplifier section, has a switching power supply, and should be robust in the face of spikes and sags.

What a load of rubbish (1)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#23042672)

My home theatre system is a 15" iMac DV, an Internet radio and an old zonked-out TV hooked up to a digibox.
I think the whole thing comes to around £199. That would double if I decided to treat myself to an iPod.

You're not your Home Theater (1)

H3XCAT (953564) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043238)

What a waste of money. For that kind of coin you could actually get out of the house, travel, see the world, & live a little (or a lot) ...maybe even get laid.

Then, save some starving orphans.

P.S. "The things you own, they end up owning you".
- Tyler Durden

Re:You're not your Home Theater (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23043510)

Agreed. I'd mod this up if I had points. Our over the top obsession with having things and things and things is going to be our downfall.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>