Johnny_Boy Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Hi all, I have been told on many many occasions that the ratio you spend on sound and video should be approximately 50-50. But what constitutes this ratio?? For example if you have a general set up of 5.1 speakers, receiver, blu-ray and plasma/projector does just speakers and display come into the ratio as the other components handle both?? Reason why i ask is that it seems that once you get past this initial set up and get further into this (hobby/obsession) it becomes all about the audio. Pre/pro set ups with the video really taking the back seat. As even if you spend your 6-8k on your mid/high end JVC type projectors plus your 2k screen that is basically all you will need to spend (providing you don’t go down the anamorphic path which adds 2-16k depending on who you use) Now look at your audio as really the sky’s the limit in terms of components and even cables if you buy into that rubbish. Then looking at room treatment. Does this come into the 50-50 mix as well? Again it’s totally favoured on the audio side. As getting a room dark is easy, it’s treating it for sound that is the hard part. The only thing i can assume is that this ratio is for standard 5.1 systems with no pre/pro set ups in your standard home with no room treatments. So the question is how to you value your components in your current system, is your more devoted to the audio or video side of things. For me I have spent twice the amount on audio gear that the display side of things. (Excluding receiver/bluray)
CustomHT Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Hi all,I have been told on many many occasions that the ratio you spend on sound and video should be approximately 50-50. But what constitutes this ratio?? For example if you have a general set up of 5.1 speakers, receiver, blu-ray and plasma/projector does just speakers and display come into the ratio as the other components handle both?? Reason why i ask is that it seems that once you get past this initial set up and get further into this (hobby/obsession) it becomes all about the audio. Pre/pro set ups with the video really taking the back seat. As even if you spend your 6-8k on your mid/high end JVC type projectors plus your 2k screen that is basically all you will need to spend (providing you don’t go down the anamorphic path which adds 2-16k depending on who you use) Now look at your audio as really the sky’s the limit in terms of components and even cables if you buy into that rubbish. Then looking at room treatment. Does this come into the 50-50 mix as well? Again it’s totally favoured on the audio side. As getting a room dark is easy, it’s treating it for sound that is the hard part. The only thing i can assume is that this ratio is for standard 5.1 systems with no pre/pro set ups in your standard home with no room treatments. So the question is how to you value your components in your current system, is your more devoted to the audio or video side of things. For me I have spent twice the amount on audio gear that the display side of things. (Excluding receiver/bluray) I'd say mine would be approx 2.5:1 or 3:1 ratio leading towards Audio, But I guess it depends what you value more.. and then if your into 2ch music aswell as movies.
gavincato Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 audio for me. in my ht room my "tv" is relatively cheap. 3k projector, $1500 screen. My sound gear is roughly 20k new, so about 4:1
brodricj Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Look. Don't get too worked up about it. This is a bit of a non-issue really. You've asked how to value the components in a system. The easy answer is of course the value of a component is whatever someone else is prepared to pay for it. Hence it might not be worth much compared to what you paid for it, or it might be worth more. How you proportion the value of the components towards video or audio again is a non-issue. If I had a $100k to spend I certainly wouldn't spend half of it on the video side. If I had $10k to spend I probably would spend half of it on the video side. I wouldn't budget so much for audio and so much for video, I'd just buy what works out best value for everything within the budget.
Ventura Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 I started the way I would assume most non-enthusiasts start. I put video way way ahead of audio. I dropped 3k on a 1080p projector a year before I advanced past a crappy $600 Creative 5.1 digital system. It's like, the picture was great, but I wasn't really there. It wasn't until I then dropped 2.7k on an audio package that I started to feel like I had something approaching a home cinema setup. On a budget, granted, but a home cinema nonetheless. Now, well... how the times have changed. Not only did I just buy a new receiver, but I've been saving for a couple of months and will shortly be putting 3k into an SVS subwoofer. I think the problem people associate with audio is that it's not tangible. You can touch the screen, but you can't touch the sound. The being able to see is emphasised so much more than the being able to hear, and I think sound is a little more subjective than the picture. What looks good to one will look good to another more than what sounds good to one will sound good to another.
POV Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 For my tastes it is a lot cheaper and easier to achieve excellent video than audio. Which is not to say that you can't spend up hugely on video equipment, just that you can imo achieve very acceptable results without huge expenditure. Of course there is no doubt videophiles around that feel complete opposite. There is no golden ratio because as always with this stuff..................YMMV.
Sydneysider1503562851 Posted January 10, 2010 Posted January 10, 2010 My experience has been similar to Ventura, started on the Video side (I think because you can see what you are getting), then Audio crept up on me. I went to Clef to look at what I could get in a Wharfedale basic set-up (also Yamaha, Jamo etc), but found them underwhelming when compared to their basement of higher end speakers (and amplifiers etc). But with limited cash my upgrade path is to replace the weakest link in the Home Cinema (I'm not a 2ch music person) piece by piece. So I don't have a ratio in mind.
Nevyn72 Posted January 10, 2010 Posted January 10, 2010 (I'm not a 2ch music person) I wasn't either until I started improving the audio side. Now I've built a dedicated room biased towards music with a ratio of Audio (80%) : Video (20%) and a total spend at a level I'd rather not think about.....
50mxe20 Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 I think 3:1 or more Audeo:Video is pretty common. I'm guessing mine is currently about 3:1 but will be more one day soon.
Ronaldo Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 I would suggest that spending the equivalent that you have spent both on audio and video would be a quality setup. The reason being you may have bought all this wonderful gear and enjoy listening/watching it. However to better acoustically appreciate the experience you would need a room that would compliment the equipment. ie soundproofing it(as you may enjoy the experience but your neighbours in other rooms or homes probably will not) acoustic treatments and so forth. Its a simple thing that is in most part overlooked. And it can be very expensive to have a dedicated room that visually is amazing as well as sounding acoustically perfect or as close to. When doing a budget for a HT it is necessary to include the room. Cheers, Ron
50mxe20 Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 LOL That's a different kettle of fish all together. Currently building a new house and I care not to estimate those costs!
dham Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 LOLThat's a different kettle of fish all together. Currently building a new house and I care not to estimate those costs! I think it is better you don't estimate My current costs in proportioned to video:audio:room is 1:2.5:5 and I would expect 1:2.5:6 when it all completed
Johnny_Boy Posted January 11, 2010 Author Posted January 11, 2010 I would suggest that spending the equivalent that you have spent both on audio and video would be a quality setup. The reason being you may have bought all this wonderful gear and enjoy listening/watching it. However to better acoustically appreciate the experience you would need a room that would compliment the equipment. ie soundproofing it(as you may enjoy the experience but your neighbours in other rooms or homes probably will not) acoustic treatments and so forth. Its a simple thing that is in most part overlooked. And it can be very expensive to have a dedicated room that visually is amazing as well as sounding acoustically perfect or as close to. When doing a budget for a HT it is necessary to include the room. Cheers, Ron I assume you refering to when you do a complete system. ie your making a room with full theatre'ish finishings, and making a theme or stylistic impression for the room rather than just a dark room with big black curtains. If this is the case then yes i can see how cos to get the visual look of the theatre room would really add up fast, but this does not actually contribute to the visual cost of the installation. I refered to mainly actual equipment, or things that will influence (hopefully for the better) the performance while in use such as sound treatments. So maybe a different question along the same line would be for asthetics vs audio vs visual. With asthetics including all furnishings, lighting, carpets and the like.
Johnny_Boy Posted January 11, 2010 Author Posted January 11, 2010 I think it is better you don't estimate My current costs in proportioned to video:audio:room is 1:2.5:5 and I would expect 1:2.5:6 when it all completed nuts beat me to it
SDL Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 Look. Don't get too worked up about it. This is a bit of a non-issue really. You've asked how to value the components in a system. The easy answer is of course the value of a component is whatever someone else is prepared to pay for it. Hence it might not be worth much compared to what you paid for it, or it might be worth more. How you proportion the value of the components towards video or audio again is a non-issue. If I had a $100k to spend I certainly wouldn't spend half of it on the video side. If I had $10k to spend I probably would spend half of it on the video side. I wouldn't budget so much for audio and so much for video, I'd just buy what works out best value for everything within the budget. agreed. I think the point is that some were going out and spending $5K on a new plasma and then asking about $1K HTIB's. It really is to say if you spend so much on a TV surely you want the audio to go with it so spend at least that on the audio. But if you are really getting into the hobby the 5:1 will most likely get reversed or thereabouts - never thought where mine is it myself.
50mxe20 Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 agreed. I think the point is that some were going out and spending $5K on a new plasma and then asking about $1K HTIB's. It really is to say if you spend so much on a TV surely you want the audio to go with it so spend at least that on the audio. But if you are really getting into the hobby the 5:1 will most likely get reversed or thereabouts - never thought where mine is it myself. And you shouldn't! Dwelling on it is bad for you! Look at Alebonau's setup. The ratio must 1:10!!
betty boop Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 And you shouldn't!Dwelling on it is bad for you! Look at Alebonau's setup. The ratio must 1:10!! gulp ! yep best not to dwell on. but best to say audio is very obviously where my priority lies ! that said a lot of my front stage is used for 2ch aswell which tends to sway things and I did try re the display. certainly about best I can fit in at the present
50mxe20 Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 gulp ! yep best not to dwell on. but best to say audio is very obviously where my priority lies ! that said a lot of my front stage is used for 2ch aswell which tends to sway things and I did try re the display. certainly about best I can fit in at the present LOL Sorry mate. Brought him out of the woodwork!
Ronaldo Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 The room i am speaking about is the cost of construction as well as the aesthetic finishings. like the insulation, the design of the framing system( ie staggered stud, twin stud, rondo. the plastering as in 2 layers of soundcheck and the glue and so on) and then finally onto the bulk heads(soffits) and the nice theatre style finishings. As with audio the sky is really the limit when it comes to expense of the room.
victortubeman Posted January 11, 2010 Posted January 11, 2010 (edited) Main System only. Only including equipment, ratio is 20 to 1(audio/video) or 95%audio/ 5% video with maybe 20k to spend on projector,screen new bluray player. Cheers Victor. Edited January 11, 2010 by victortubeman
kodaz Posted January 24, 2010 Posted January 24, 2010 Mines about 5:3:1 for audio, room, video. Projector, screen and mount came to $5300 Speakers and Sub $16000 Amps, Blu ray, HD-DVD $9000 And the room we spent about $15k on as we DIY'd it. Still needs accoustic treatments though. http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/6526/ht003.jpg
Drizt Posted January 24, 2010 Posted January 24, 2010 I love both. My vote is to get the performance you want and not get caught up in $$$$. I don't mean throwing excessive dollars around, I mean buy on a performance basis. Work out what you want performance wise and then search for a cost effective solution.
Johnny_Boy Posted January 24, 2010 Author Posted January 24, 2010 Main System only.Only including equipment, ratio is 20 to 1(audio/video) or 95%audio/ 5% video with maybe 20k to spend on projector,screen new bluray player. Cheers Victor. Mines about 5:3:1 for audio, room, video.Projector, screen and mount came to $5300 Speakers and Sub $16000 Amps, Blu ray, HD-DVD $9000 And the room we spent about $15k on as we DIY'd it. Still needs accoustic treatments though. http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/6526/ht003.jpg I still have a loooooong way to go. The joys of a limited budet. I think systems like this are going to be when i win lotto and not really achievable with my kind of income. Or well i still enjoy my system and dont have any friends with expensive taste in equipment so all good
kodaz Posted January 24, 2010 Posted January 24, 2010 Mines been spread over the last 8 years or so. The great thing about speakers and amplifiers as they change so infrequently so money spent there is a long term investment. Recievers, disc players and projectors tend to change quite frequently though. It would be much more entertaining to add up all I've spent on AV since I started. I thing that would be an eye opener.
Nevyn72 Posted January 24, 2010 Posted January 24, 2010 It would be much more entertaining to add up all I've spent on AV since I started. I thing that would be an eye opener. I usually find that one's more of an eye-closer, generally followed by some quiet whimpering.....
Recommended Posts