Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater some pics ... finally bought a camera

Sorry this was such a long time coming... still a lot of work left, but it's going to take the rest of the spring, so I thought I'd post what I have done so far. I'm still in analysis paralysis over the screen. (I've tried 3 different color paints so far)

theater_pics

I currently have those same 301's. How much of an improvement did you hear?

it's like an apples to oranges comparison. They're not even in the same league. (no offense meant to Bose owners). It's one of those situations where you can't believe the difference speakers make. I've always poored more money into my car speakers, but never knew what I was missing in home audio.

The first time I plugged the m60s and put on a CD (I believe it was just an old Bread CD I put on, mainly becasue it was right there and handy.) But, I heard things from the guitar I've never heard before. I was so amazed I went and grabbed the 301s and hooked them up too, and switched back and forth. All I can say, is that there is so much more range that come from the axioms that you want to go and smack the guy in the bose store in the face. I was in there just yesterday looking at their earphones, and looked at the 901s... $1400 US... I had to laugh!

The earphones... the noise dampening ones weren't that impressive either -- even took my mp3 player in to try them.


Today, I'm connecting the 301s up to see the differnce 7.1 one makes... just before I buy the Qs8, I want to make sure enough filler is coming out of them.

Did it take a little time to get used to the differences in sound? I want to get the M22's, but I more than likely be with out a sub for a period of time and am wondering if I will miss some of the bass or "fullness" of the Bose's when I transition.

I have the m60, so cannot comment on the m22. Maybe someone with m22 can chime in.

Yeh u will miss the Bass but the Sound is very clear u could prob turn up the Bass more on the Reciever an not Crank it as much but still it will sound good jus Sounds more fuller with a Sub i have a Ole Radio Shack sub but it does me for now

Probably. But the sound will be worth it. I'll point out that you should invest in a good sub (ie, a musical one). Otherwise, what's the point?

Very nice setup Bilbo. Lots of room for dragging the woman aroung the by the hair (I'm only kidding).

Is the blanket over the M60 for sonic or aesthetic reasons?

been wet sanding the wall (and forogt to take off the blanket... ), to get it as smooth as possible before the next coat of paint (reaching point of obsession with screen, might need therapy)

Very nice set-up. I have serious basement envy.

I know what you mean on the obsessing. I've been remodeling these days, and between trying to do a good job on the staining, polyurethaning (is that a word?), and painting - I'm driving myself insane.

Are you using regular paint for your screen, or is it some kind of special "screen paint"? I'de imagine that it would be tough to get an even coat on there. I did some walls in a flat off white, and the funky spots are driving me nuts. I want to keep painting, but I have decided that I'm just going to cover the bad spots with paintings instead. Drywall, plaster, etc., absorb paint so unevenly. When that first coat of primer or paint hits any spackling or joint compound and gets it wet, the roller starts making random, permanent, textures in it. Subsequent coats just keep accentuating it unless you do as you are now, get obsessive with the sandpaper.

Hmmm... For a screen, maybe a large piece of plexiglass and a paint sprayer would do the trick. Pristine smooth surface to start with and no brush marks. About 5 or 6 light even coats would probably work well.

What kind of camera did you get? It takes nice pics. I'm looking for something less than $150. I saw a Nikon Coolpix 2200 at Target for $138 yesterday. I want something that has about the same picture quality as your camera. The Nikon web page says "Effextive pixels: 2.0 million; CCD total pixels: 2.14 million; Image Size: 1.92 million (1,600 x 1,200)" which seems reasonably good to me. Is that comparable in specification to yours? Does anyone have any experience with this camera or have any other suggestions?

Good luck,

Michael_A,
I'm not much of a shudder bug, probably because I don’t have kids. But, I needed something simple to use for pics for eBay etc… so, with that said, I didn’t spend a great deal of time researching and I didn’t spend a lot of money. I went with a 3.2 megapixels, the Kodak easyshare cx7300. It was 130.00. Its big redeeming factor is its ease of use. Testament to that is my docking-station can even use it, and she’s a techno-phobic. (just kidding)

I’m using a basic flat white mix (adding a little grey to help bring out some of the blacks). If you spend the time to wet sand, you can get a perfectly flat surface. If you use a spray application – you’re right -- you get the best result. I find a fine, sponge roller to work well enough for me. Thinking retrospectively, I should of probably went with one of the standard screens that you can buy. But the standard sizes, 92”, 120” diagonal just wasn’t big enough for me – and the larger customized screens get really expensive!

Well, it back to my painting. I got to finish this, so I can start working on the big gash on the side of the room.

I don't know anything about the camera. But, my Consumer Reports magazine arrived yesterday, and they rated digital cameras. The only 2 megapixel camera rated was the Nikon Coolpix 2100/2200. It got an overall rating of "very good," and a print quality rating of "very good." ("Excellent is the top rating, "very good" the next.) That's like getting a "4" on a scale of "5."

They commented: "The inexpensive Nikon has very good battery life, though it's resolution somewhat limits your ability to make quality enlargements from cropped photos. All the rated cameras offer very good or excellent quality at the 4x6, 5x7, and even the 8x10 size we use for prints in our tests. Difference between very good and excellent quality are not large. The 2- and 3-megapixel cameras offer the least flexibility to manipulate images without losing quality."

I would think that if you're a casual photographer, looking for something to take photos for posting on the Internet, or making small prints, the Nikon would be a good choice.

If you'll go to Google and do a search for "Nikon Coolpix 2200 reviews," you'll find a lot of information including prices. The 2200 is a relatively new model. You'll find more information on the 2100 which the 2200 has recently replaced, and I would think they are very similar. The $138 price seems to be a very good one.

I am most definitely NOT an expert, or experienced photographer, but I just got a Fuji Finepix A303 3.2 Megapixel camera from DigitalFoto Discount Club, for $167.80 delivered. It's an older model. Fuji has since brought out the A310, and, just recently, a still newer model, the A330. Strangely, I found better reviews for the A303 than I found for the A310. Haven't seen any reviews on the A330. When new, the A303 retailed for $200. Do not construe this as a "recommendation," but I have been very satisfied with this camera. And for $17.80 over your budget, you get an extra magapixel of resolution. Just wanted to give you another option. However, I don't think you could go wrong with the Nikon, and it's a better price.

Hope this all helps. Good luck, and let us know what you get and how it turns out.

When you're at google, check out froogle as well. It is Google's "PreiceWatch" so to say. It has been around for a while, but they finally put a link up to it. It's still beta, but it has been very very helpful in finding the best prices on stuff online.

Also, what projector are you using? And how big is your screen going to be?

I went with the Panasonic 500, lcd. rough estimate on size ...the width is 10.5 feet by 6 feet high.

There is definitly less bass from the M22's, I have them and was replacing the cheaper Bose 201's, same driver one less tweeter as the 301's. I have tried the M22's with the sub off and cranked up the bass on the receiver and it sounded OK in the low end but the mids and high ends are worth the change over. Adding the sub just rounds out the system and you will get better low end from the sub than bose could ever hope to give out.