2. speakers
  3. 191976-5445

55” or 65” TV Screen Size and Your Speakers: Please Join Survey

 

With my two-way speaker build on hold as the clock ticks towards December 31st when my $1200.00 in Sony card points expire, I am struggling to decide between the 55” or 65” Sony A95L OLED TV. Sitting on chairs at Best Buy, I tape measured 11 ft from the 55”, which looked small, while the 65” looked too big at the same distance.

 

My largely empty living room is 20 ft x 11, with the west side open, crossing a 4 ft wide x 27 ft hallway and into a ~ 10 ft x 9 kitchen and then 3 ft wide staircase. A triangular ceiling that peaks at 11 ft is above it all.   

 

I plan to listen 10 ft from my speakers, with the TV between them and a foot or so behind the horns.

 

I built the 65” (56.9” w x 33” h) cardboard mock and to my eyes at 12 ft the 65” “screen” looks immersive.  

 

I will build the 55” (48.25” x 27.5”) mock as soon as I can get more cardboard from the local supermarket.

 

Meanwhile, it might be very helpful to learn of the experiences of other 55” and 65” TV users.

 

How far are you from one of those screen sizes?  

 

Do you sit on a chair or recliner?

 

Please describe the speakers that you use in place of the TV’s internal speakers, and how far you sit from them.

 

 

ajant

Showing 4 responses by james633

james633
1,048 posts
 

Hmm, always bigger always. No one ever said I wish I bought a smaller set. 
 

I watch on a 120” screen from 10’ away (pictures in my bio). I also sit 10’ from my speakers (also horns). I own an 83” tv too and it looks so small after sitting in front of my main rig. I sit in a powered recliner. 
 

I would really go bigger than 65. 83” is the new 65”, and for watching wide screen movies from 10’ an 83” is really the minimum. If you are just watching the news and what not it really does not matter what size you go with and 65” is fine. 

james633
1,048 posts
 

We’ll never compromise audio for a bigger screen as you will regret it. Not wanting to move my left hand speaker closer to the wall is what stopped me from going with a 130” screen. Going from a 110” to a 120” screen was 7” wider and even having the speaker 7” closer to the wall affected the sound negatively. It is all a balancing act. 
 

I just use phantom center and see no reason not too (I have owned centers before). If you sit in the middle the sound is 100% correct in the center and I like to watch movies by myself. People talk about comb filtering on movies with phantom center as the speakers are in mono for most speech but as a very picky audiophile (aren’t we all) I have no issues with phantom center. The center is really a benefit for people off axis more than anything.   
 

On a side note I bought my house in Ohio for $95 a square foot… 

 

revel’s 226be is a nice sounding slender speaker if you ever wanted more room but I think they lack dynamics/snap next to a good horn. I would keep the horn and rock the phantom center. 

james633
1,048 posts
 

Yes bigger is correct but I missed that ajant is physically limited on width. To be clear I would just fill the entire space between the speakers with a tv/screen.

 

If the TV is behind the plane of the speakers it will not affect the sound much. I have done sighted A/B with my screen between the speakers and removed. I am not convinced a TV is anymore reflective than dry wall. Horns greatly limit the reflections off the front wall too and will be less effected by a TV. 
 

Technically a viewing angle of 60% feels about right and that happens to be the typical audiophile setup too (equilateral triangle).  

james633
1,048 posts
 

Another option if you are not pressed for cash is both a TV and a projector. You can mount the 55” TV as planned. Then put a pull down acoustically transparent screen in front of your speakers. Best of both worlds. Bit movies at night and no 2ch compromise. 
 

some of these cheap life style projectors are good enough for the casual movie watcher. 
 

https://www.valerion.com/visionMaster

More to discover