https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

At least they had the sense to show off the TV, not hide it. I never
understood the sentiment that you had to hide your nice, big screen TV. Are
you ashamed you watch television or something. Are you trying to pretend
you don't watch TV? Always was a mystery to me.

On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

But in my shot I got to se it every day. ;~)



At least they had the sense to show off the TV, not hide it. I never
understood the sentiment that you had to hide your nice, big screen TV.
Are you ashamed you watch television or something. Are you trying to
pretend you don't watch TV? Always was a mystery to me.



Exactly and most of the time the pieces, designed to hide the TV, are
left open with the TV exposed because it is too much trouble to open and
close every day.

FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

But in my shot I got to se it every day. ;~)



At least they had the sense to show off the TV, not hide it. I never
understood the sentiment that you had to hide your nice, big screen TV.
Are you ashamed you watch television or something. Are you trying to
pretend you don't watch TV? Always was a mystery to me.



Exactly and most of the time the pieces, designed to hide the TV, are left
open with the TV exposed because it is too much trouble to open and close
every day.

FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

That looks nice. Almost like a bar. Did you think about putting in some
racks for the bottles and a few bar stools. You can sit down, have a drink.
then back up and watch the big TV monster while sipping your favorite
beverage. Think about it Leon. You can do it! ;-)

On 12/8/2015 8:25 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

But in my shot I got to se it every day. ;~)



At least they had the sense to show off the TV, not hide it. I never
understood the sentiment that you had to hide your nice, big screen TV.
Are you ashamed you watch television or something. Are you trying to
pretend you don't watch TV? Always was a mystery to me.



Exactly and most of the time the pieces, designed to hide the TV, are
left open with the TV exposed because it is too much trouble to open
and close every day.

FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

That looks nice. Almost like a bar. Did you think about putting in
some racks for the bottles and a few bar stools.

No. The base cabinet is relative low.

You can sit down, have
a drink. then back up and watch the big TV monster while sipping your
favorite beverage. Think about it Leon. You can do it! ;-)

Actually our recliner love seat arrangement has cup holders. ;~)

On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 10:17:57 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

I agree! When a piece is built to be purpose specific, sometimes it looks better fulfilling its designed purpose. That piece of furniture looks really pretty with the TV in it.

FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

Just being picky here Leon, but your photo doesn't do credit to that piece. In person, it is quite striking, and the design elements are much more apparent. I not only liked that piece (so did Kathy!)a lot, but thought it was quite clever.

Robert

On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered. I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and perhaps a
little shorter.

But, of course, I'm not.

On 12/8/2015 1:22 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered.

Thank you!


Yes, not mitered! Mitered does look better in some instances but simply
in the long run not as strong.

I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and perhaps a
little shorter.

But, of course, I'm not.

This all had to be a specific size and I also considered the very likely
probability that a replacement TV will be even larger.
All dimensions were requested to be the same size of the fireplace that
was once in that very spot.
This is the drawing that the client signed off on.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

On 12/8/2015 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 10:17:57 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/



https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

I agree! When a piece is built to be purpose specific, sometimes it
looks better fulfilling its designed purpose. That piece of
furniture looks really pretty with the TV in it.

Yes many of my pieces fill specific desires by the client and do in deed
look odd when not in the place that it is designed to go. Until I added
the TV in the drawing, that I presented for the client to sign off on, I
was not sure either. ;~)




FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


Just being picky here Leon, but your photo doesn't do credit to that
piece.

It does not. I forgot to bring my better dedicated camera, that picture
was with my iPhone. I'll be back though, tow more pieces have been
ordered for the bed room. I'll try to remember to take the good camera.
;~)


In person, it is quite striking, and the design elements are
much more apparent. I not only liked that piece (so did Kathy!)a
lot, but thought it was quite clever.

Robert


Thank you Robert, and Kathy too!

PS Will the two of you be visiting us at Christmas?

On 12/8/2015 1:59 PM, Leon wrote:
On 12/8/2015 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 7, 2015 at 10:17:57 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 12/7/2015 8:21 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:


"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in message
...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/




https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

It looks much nicer there than in your shop. ;-)

I agree! When a piece is built to be purpose specific, sometimes it
looks better fulfilling its designed purpose. That piece of
furniture looks really pretty with the TV in it.

Yes many of my pieces fill specific desires by the client and do in deed
look odd when not in the place that it is designed to go. Until I added
the TV in the drawing, that I presented for the client to sign off on, I
was not sure either. ;~)




FWIW another view of our TV setup. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


Just being picky here Leon, but your photo doesn't do credit to that
piece.

It does not. I forgot to bring my better dedicated camera, that picture
was with my iPhone. I'll be back though, tow more pieces have been
ordered for the bed room. I'll try to remember to take the good camera.
;~)


In person, it is quite striking, and the design elements are
much more apparent. I not only liked that piece (so did Kathy!)a
lot, but thought it was quite clever.

Robert


Thank you Robert, and Kathy too!

PS Will the two of you be visiting us at Christmas?



Just now realized that you were talking about MY TV set up. IIRC the
iPhone was used on that too. I showed that piece to three different
people this week, in our house. It still gets the ooh's and ahh's.

Kim has heard my "spheil" so many times she can almost recite it word
for word. LOL.

On 12/8/2015 2:53 PM, Leon wrote:
All dimensions were requested to be the same size of the fireplace that
was once in that very spot.
This is the drawing that the client signed off on.

I had no doubt it was what the client requested.

On 12/8/2015 1:22 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered. I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and perhaps a
little shorter.

Just eyeballing it, my guess is that if the client upgrades the set by
one increment, you'll have the same effect. The edge of the set will
coincide with the width and the top of the set will set ~ even with top
of the "mantle."

We have a base cabinet only for our 52" flat panel. Wanted to go larger
with the set but SWMBO was reluctant (for you unmarried types that means
it was a non-starter at that time). The base however is a bit "over
width." Not so much that it looks weird but wider than it need be. The
strangest thing is that if I were to replace it with a 65" flat panel
(the recommended maximum for the room setting, that TV will be just
perfectly situated just hair under 2" narrower than the base cabinet.
Just a happy coincidence I assure you.g (Leastwise that is my story
and I'm sticking to it!)

On 12/8/2015 7:11 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/8/2015 1:22 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered. I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and perhaps a
little shorter.

Just eyeballing it, my guess is that if the client upgrades the set by
one increment, you'll have the same effect. The edge of the set will
coincide with the width and the top of the set will set ~ even with top
of the "mantle."

But that will all depend on the width of the perimeter bezel and the
height of the stand the TV is mounted on.




We have a base cabinet only for our 52" flat panel. Wanted to go larger
with the set but SWMBO was reluctant (for you unmarried types that means
it was a non-starter at that time). The base however is a bit "over
width." Not so much that it looks weird but wider than it need be. The
strangest thing is that if I were to replace it with a 65" flat panel
(the recommended maximum for the room setting, that TV will be just
perfectly situated just hair under 2" narrower than the base cabinet.
Just a happy coincidence I assure you.g (Leastwise that is my story
and I'm sticking to it!)



Our set up is good for up to a 90" TV. My wife was reluctant to go from
46 to 70 but after watching the 70 for almost a year she did not want
anything smaller when that set pooped out.

On 12/8/2015 11:12 PM, Leon wrote:
On 12/8/2015 7:11 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/8/2015 1:22 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/


I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered. I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and perhaps a
little shorter.

Just eyeballing it, my guess is that if the client upgrades the set by
one increment, you'll have the same effect. The edge of the set will
coincide with the width and the top of the set will set ~ even with top
of the "mantle."

But that will all depend on the width of the perimeter bezel and the
height of the stand the TV is mounted on.

As alluded to, it's more of a "guestimation" but in this case I "think"
moving up to the next larger size screen would probably address Greg's
concern. Myself? I don't find anything "wrong" with the set up as
photographed. OTOH, if it had been built to perfectly "frame" the
existing set, they'd be SOL if they wanted to upgrade.



We have a base cabinet only for our 52" flat panel. Wanted to go larger
with the set but SWMBO was reluctant (for you unmarried types that means
it was a non-starter at that time). The base however is a bit "over
width." Not so much that it looks weird but wider than it need be. The
strangest thing is that if I were to replace it with a 65" flat panel
(the recommended maximum for the room setting, that TV will be just
perfectly situated just hair under 2" narrower than the base cabinet.
Just a happy coincidence I assure you.g (Leastwise that is my story
and I'm sticking to it!)



Our set up is good for up to a 90" TV. My wife was reluctant to go from
46 to 70 but after watching the 70 for almost a year she did not want
anything smaller when that set pooped out.

Funny how that goes, eh? SWMBO was dragged, kicking and screaming, into
flat panel land from a nice 36" CRT. My initial foray occurred right
about the time of the phaseout of analog and intro of digital television
so I had that going for me. There's a formula out there for calculating
the maximum practical size of a television screen given the distance
between the normal viewing position and the screen. My 52" is at one
end of the range and a 65" will take up to near maximum. I recommend to
friends that they buy according to that formula (or at least give it
serious consideration) and go large. Not much more expense at the
outset but they'll enjoy the resultsg

Did your client give any consideration to utilizing one or more segments
of the "mantle" to house the center channel speaker(s)? Seems to me
that would be a good move. Just replace the solid "panel" with audio
transparent material.

On 12/9/2015 8:02 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/8/2015 11:12 PM, Leon wrote:
On 12/8/2015 7:11 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/8/2015 1:22 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 12/5/2015 2:15 PM, Leon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/



https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/



I love the wood and the color. I like that the drawer fronts are not
mitered. I like the "slot" down the middle of the uprights.

The one thing that surprises me is the dimensions of the TV as compared
with the opening in the unit. When I saw the pics in your shop I
assumed
the TV would fit between the uprights and that the space between the TV
and the "frame" would be the same on the sides and at the top. If I
were
the client I think I'd have asked or the unit to be wider, and
perhaps a
little shorter.

Just eyeballing it, my guess is that if the client upgrades the set by
one increment, you'll have the same effect. The edge of the set will
coincide with the width and the top of the set will set ~ even with top
of the "mantle."

But that will all depend on the width of the perimeter bezel and the
height of the stand the TV is mounted on.

As alluded to, it's more of a "guestimation" but in this case I "think"
moving up to the next larger size screen would probably address Greg's
concern. Myself? I don't find anything "wrong" with the set up as
photographed. OTOH, if it had been built to perfectly "frame" the
existing set, they'd be SOL if they wanted to upgrade.



We have a base cabinet only for our 52" flat panel. Wanted to go larger
with the set but SWMBO was reluctant (for you unmarried types that means
it was a non-starter at that time). The base however is a bit "over
width." Not so much that it looks weird but wider than it need be. The
strangest thing is that if I were to replace it with a 65" flat panel
(the recommended maximum for the room setting, that TV will be just
perfectly situated just hair under 2" narrower than the base cabinet.
Just a happy coincidence I assure you.g (Leastwise that is my story
and I'm sticking to it!)



Our set up is good for up to a 90" TV. My wife was reluctant to go from
46 to 70 but after watching the 70 for almost a year she did not want
anything smaller when that set pooped out.

Funny how that goes, eh? SWMBO was dragged, kicking and screaming, into
flat panel land from a nice 36" CRT. My initial foray occurred right
about the time of the phaseout of analog and intro of digital television
so I had that going for me. There's a formula out there for calculating
the maximum practical size of a television screen given the distance
between the normal viewing position and the screen. My 52" is at one
end of the range and a 65" will take up to near maximum. I recommend to
friends that they buy according to that formula (or at least give it
serious consideration) and go large. Not much more expense at the
outset but they'll enjoy the resultsg

We actually ended up downsizing from 70 to 65 and she was not happy. :~)




Did your client give any consideration to utilizing one or more segments
of the "mantle" to house the center channel speaker(s)? Seems to me
that would be a good move. Just replace the solid "panel" with audio
transparent material.


I actually suggested that there be more shelves on bottom for L,R, and
center speakers but in her words, we are not really into all that
kind'a stuff. We just need the TV and the DVR.

The panels on the drawers and mantel doors are permanently captured so
they would need to be rebuilt.

When delivering the unit she mentioned to her husband, "we need to get
with it on all this new technology".

Fortunately the new components like AppleTV, Roku, and the likes are
tiny and adding in the center at the bottom would not be an issue.
In fact the Roku3, maybe all models, are RF so placement in the mantel
would not be an issue. The columns are hollow with open backs, wiring
would not be a problem.


Had they elected for all 3 openings on the bottom to have the cloth
panels they could have hidden all the "furure" front speakers and more
equipment.
Oh well, all I would have to do is remove the drawers and build 2 more
cloth panel doors.

On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 1:59:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:

Thank you Robert, and Kathy too!

PS Will the two of you be visiting us at Christmas?

Yessir!

Just locked in with Karl. We will be there as soon as we can!

Both of us are looking forward to see "all yall".

Robert (and Kathy!)

On 12/9/2015 9:41 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 1:59:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:

Thank you Robert, and Kathy too!

PS Will the two of you be visiting us at Christmas?

Yessir!

Just locked in with Karl. We will be there as soon as we can!

Both of us are looking forward to see "all yall".

Robert (and Kathy!)





He passed along the good news. Can't wait to see Y'all.

Sorry to hear bout your mother and the life chaos and it sounds a whole
like what we have been going through with dad. He has lived in 4
different places since this time last year and has been in the hospital
4 times between Dec of last year and the middle of June this year. The
last 6 months have been considerably less stressful. Nursing
homes/memory care homes are not as they appear to be on the surface.