If there is no center channel speaker present, the center channel is split evenly between the front left/right speakers. If these speakers are flanking the TV, the sound appears to come from the middle. I had pretty good results using just 2 towers + sub for over a year, on either side of a 42" plasma. The rental house was not amenable to setting up a full surround system, and there wasn't a good spot for a center channel speaker either. Of course the OP could always buy 2 L/R speakers and a matching C as well, but for movies I think a sub would show more of an audible improvement than the center channel. Just depends on the budget.
If there is no center channel speaker present, the center channel is split evenly between the front left/right speakers. If these speakers are flanking the TV, the sound appears to come from the middle. I had pretty good results using just 2 towers + sub for over a year, on either side of a 42" plasma. The rental house was not amenable to setting up a full surround system, and there wasn't a good spot for a center channel speaker either. Of course the OP could always buy 2 L/R speakers and a matching C as well, but for movies I think a sub would show more of an audible improvement than the center channel. Just depends on the budget.
The first part made my head hurt.
Second part: http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduc...2275399&sr=8-1
done and done
x26
Senior member
- Sep 17, 2007
- 734
- 15
- 81
Check out this article:
http://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/products/articles/131062.html
It gives you a bit of a rundown on the "frequency response" spec and shows a couple of hypothetical frequency response graphs. The published spec is basically complete BS (although it does help to determine how low the useful bass goes). What the guy doesn't tell you is that your room affects the curve even more than the actual speaker does. Moving your speaker 1 foot to the left can change its response curve at your listening position substantially. Having a "live" room with lots of hard surfaces will wreak havoc on the sound, as will having a too-"dead" room with lots of carpets, curtains, and other sound-absorbing furnishings. There are all kinds of treatments to correct room problems, but suffice it to say that the average home speaker is designed for the average home, and if you put it into a room with 2 walls full of floor-to-ceiling windows then they will not sound as intended.
So this is the reason for buying a receiver with MultEQ calibration. It takes actual measurements in your actual room with your actual speakers, and averages them over multiple listening positions to correct the sound. The frequency response of the speakers becomes a minor part of the overall equation.
Of course, this isn't to say that speaker quality should be ignored. Distortion happens when speakers are pushed too hard, and crap drivers will distort quickly and often. Crap designs can also make for peaks or valleys in the response curve that can become uncorrectable. IMHO a 2-way is harder to mess up than a 3-way. They are simply less complicated. All of the speakers I've ever owned have been 2-ways, and I have never found them wanting.
Size is another issue. There are two competing factors at work. First is the front baffle size; where the drivers are (usually) mounted. In general, a narrower baffle will give the sound better dispersion and phase characteristics. However, in general you want larger drivers for the bass, and they simply can't fit in a narrow baffle; and larger size of the speakers overall will also give better bass response.
In summary, acoustics is supremely analog. You can't apply your usual digital purchasing decision methods.
The Onkyo 60x series is a great value and my typical recommendation for most people. I also usually recommend the Polk Monitor or R series; towers in the front, bookshelves in the rear, center in the center :hmm:. They are a fantastic value at their "sale" price at Newegg or Fry's. Also, they have something which is stupidly missing from most speakers makers' lineups: continuity. Polk has made similar speakers using similar drivers for over a decade. Buying a new pair to aurally match to your existing ones isn't a problem, even if your existing ones are 5 years old.
Spend about $500 on the speakers and you'll be happy. If you can't afford that right away, just do the front towers and buy the rest later. Or, perhaps even better, buy a sub and the pair of bookshelf speakers that you will eventually use for rears; use those speakers as fronts until you can afford to buy the towers and center, and then move them to the rear.
Great Post!! Thanks!
x26
Senior member
- Sep 17, 2007
- 734
- 15
- 81
x26
Senior member
- Sep 17, 2007
- 734
- 15
- 81
Hi Pane,
I'm about here -- Cocked and Locked and Finger nervously on the Trigger!! lol If I don't Fire soon My Mind will certainly Explode into the Abys btween Nothingness and Eternity.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=32625032#post32625032
I want to setup my home Theatre: (3rd since 1992)
* Media Room is 40 x 20 with 24 foot cathedral cielings
* Listening area for movies is 18 x 12
* already have Panasonic 3d 50in Plasma ST50
Budget = Best Bang for Buck/ "The Bill Man Cometh"+as little as possible
My picks so far:
Onkyo TX-NR609 7.2 Channel Network THX Certified A/V Receiver
Speakers:
** Polk Audio Monitor60 Series II Floorstanding Loudspeaker (Black) Each
** Polk Audio CS1 Series II Center Channel Speaker
** Polk Audio PSW Series PSW10 Black 10-inch Powered Subwoofer Each
** Have some older Polks for Rear(R15's)
*******Most important now is getting right receiver(Networked important)
*******And good speakers(Front, Center and sub Matched Well)
*******Best Bang for the Least $$
Last edited:
x26
Senior member
- Sep 17, 2007
- 734
- 15
- 81
One more thing Pane:
Be carefull buying speakers--You don't ussually get what you pay for; Especially for the Higher end. (in my 30 years of Audio experience As Consumer)
So Let the Buyer (you and Me) Beware!!
I started with that receiver, but I've been focusing more on speakers of late. The one thing I wanted to verify was that it had at least the XT ver of MultEQ.
I presume you're shopping at Newegg. I think the extra driver (vs the Monitor50's) would be good for your larger space, especially since you can get it for free!
You may want to consider shopping around for the CS2. I've seen it as low as $100, and again, for your larger space, you might appreciate the larger drivers.
For the sub, I'd suggest looking into the BIC F12 that vi edit mentioned at the start of the tread. As far as I can tell, the best places to spend money is on the front L/R channels and on the sub. In the latter, there seems to be a better correlation between price and performance.
This has been a unique shopping experience. This is the only market I've encountered where performance has little more than a passing relationship with pricing and specs. That's infuriating enough on it's own, but when you consider the critical role of the speakers in a HT setup, as well as the duration for which they'll be used in this capacity, it's almost incapacitating to try to make any decisions!
On an unrelated note, here's another article I found helpful: Choosing the Crossover Frequency
The 609 has MultEQ XT.
x26's lineup is pretty much what I would recommend, with the possible exception of the sub. The BIC subs are supposed to be very good value for dollar, although I've never heard one myself. If I were starting from scratch, I'd probably go for the BIC (and I've contemplated getting one or two, even with my existing setup -- if I were a little more settled job-wise and had a permanent home theater set up somewhere, I would probably go for it. As it is, most of my gear is currently in storage.).
In the end, don't worry, be happy. Your receiver will take care of any major problems with the sound (unless your room is really quite screwed up to begin with). In my experience, you will be more satisfied with some large floorstanders and a bit of a piecemeal approach to the speakers than you will be with a HTIB. The tiny speakers in the HTIB are OK but they are designed more to be small and fit in with the decor. If you have the space and spousal approval to fit some traditional speaker boxes into your room, you will probably be happier with their performance. Not saying the HTIB speakers are bad, but they are aiming for conflicting objectives. The traditional speaker designs are simply less compromised. Going with a major brand like Polk with proven, tried-and-true designs and drivers (I have a pair of R40's that I bought, used, in 2002, and they're still going strong) it is hard to go too wrong for the minimal amount of money that you are spending (minimal in terms of decent quality audio gear). It is not worth stressing over. Just do it.
x26's lineup is pretty much what I would recommend, with the possible exception of the sub. The BIC subs are supposed to be very good value for dollar, although I've never heard one myself. If I were starting from scratch, I'd probably go for the BIC (and I've contemplated getting one or two, even with my existing setup -- if I were a little more settled job-wise and had a permanent home theater set up somewhere, I would probably go for it. As it is, most of my gear is currently in storage.).
In the end, don't worry, be happy. Your receiver will take care of any major problems with the sound (unless your room is really quite screwed up to begin with). In my experience, you will be more satisfied with some large floorstanders and a bit of a piecemeal approach to the speakers than you will be with a HTIB. The tiny speakers in the HTIB are OK but they are designed more to be small and fit in with the decor. If you have the space and spousal approval to fit some traditional speaker boxes into your room, you will probably be happier with their performance. Not saying the HTIB speakers are bad, but they are aiming for conflicting objectives. The traditional speaker designs are simply less compromised. Going with a major brand like Polk with proven, tried-and-true designs and drivers (I have a pair of R40's that I bought, used, in 2002, and they're still going strong) it is hard to go too wrong for the minimal amount of money that you are spending (minimal in terms of decent quality audio gear). It is not worth stressing over. Just do it.
I'm not as sure. I checked Onkyo's website, and it lists the TX-NR609 as 2EQ. Looks like I'd need to bump up to the TX-NR709 to get XT.
As far as speakers go, I'm still jumping around like a Mexican bean. Right now I'm looking at speakers with 6.5" and 8" woofers for the front channel. I'm still deciding between direct, di- and bipolar for the surrounds. I'm trying to optimize for games more than movies, and haven't been able to find any gaming specific comparisons. Right now I'm leaning toward bipolar as they seem the most versatile. I would get dipolar, but I wouldn't be able to put them in their optimal location.
I know, and yet, can't help myself. The more I learn, the more I want to know!
z1ggy
Lifer
- May 17, 2008
- 10,010
- 66
- 91
Just for some more info, in my thread I tested a few speakers, some had 6.5 and others 8 inch woofers. I enjoyed the 6.5 better..I dont know if it was because things were calibrated right, but the 8'' just sounded so bulky and overly deep. The 6.5'' was more clean and crisp and with a good sub I think it would be plenty enough for me. At this point I think I am leaning toward 6.5'' floor standing fronts. Not planning on getting rears or a center for a while, so I can't comment there. Most likely I will just get matching bookshelves for the surround and a matching center.
You are right! Amazon has it listed as MultEQ XT. I looked in the manual and it states 2EQ. Sorry for the mix-up.
Heh. Slowly, grasshopper. This is your first HT system, not your last. Pretty much anything that you get (including just 2 front towers and a receiver) will be head and shoulders over the sound that you've been living with up to this point. Only you can determine how far you'll go down the rabbit hole (purpose-built HT room? go for dipoles for the side surrounds, PLUS bipolar or direct for the rear surrounds! Don't forget, you're looking at 7.1 channels, not 5.1. Anything less than purpose-built? Ehhhh, doesn't really matter, but dipoles are harder to place and the direct-radiator speakers will give you less of a hassle.) but the first step shouldn't be this hard.
I understand. I think it's a phase we all go through. I guess I should be thankful that I went through it 15 years ago when discrete, digital 5.1 channels for home audio were still a dream and Dolby Pro Logic from VHS tapes was all we had -- or LaserDisc, if you were lucky. I have owned a lot of speakers and nearly as many receivers. Over time I have cared less and less about the specs as I realized that the space you have impacts the sound more than the speakers does. As long as you're going with a "given" space instead of being able to dedicate a HT room, it really doesn't make much of a difference IMO, so you should be looking for basic competence rather than ultimate performance. It does pay to have features in the receiver (I remember the day when I switched over from analog component video to HDMI -- oh happy day to get rid of all those cables!)
I will say with respect to your dilemma, I would go with the 6.5" woofer speakers. Bigger woofers are for deeper bass. You will have a subwoofer, eventually if not immediately. Keep your front baffle small and go for the 6.5". Also, direct radiators for the surrounds will be substantially cheaper than dipoles or bipoles. IMO it's not worth the money to pay for the upgrade when you're looking at a speaker budget of less than $1000 overall. Put that money into upgrading the sub (or buying 2 subs), it will make more of a noticeable difference.
Well, I think I may have found a winner. I stumbled across a Premier Acoustic 5.1 bundle on Amazon. I got to looking at it, and I think with a little tweaking, it may be the way to go.
Based on this review at Home Theater Focus, I would bump the PA-6C to the PA-8C. I would also probably shop around for a different sub. That'd put me at 3.1 for now, and then I could mull over the surrounds while I enjoy my new rig.
I'm still reading up on the PA-6F's. I haven't been able to find a crossover frequency, which is somewhat surprising. Still, by all accounts so far, these speakers offer very good quality for a noticeably lower price.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that my preference for bipolar was heavily influenced by this article at hometheater.com
Based on this review at Home Theater Focus, I would bump the PA-6C to the PA-8C. I would also probably shop around for a different sub. That'd put me at 3.1 for now, and then I could mull over the surrounds while I enjoy my new rig.
I'm still reading up on the PA-6F's. I haven't been able to find a crossover frequency, which is somewhat surprising. Still, by all accounts so far, these speakers offer very good quality for a noticeably lower price.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that my preference for bipolar was heavily influenced by this article at hometheater.com
Last edited:
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
You should consider getting a center channel. You are missing a lot of the intended sound field.
Soccerman06
Diamond Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 5,830
- 5
- 81
I would be a little suspicious of that "Home Theater Focus" site. If you look through all the speaker brands (and the receiver brands) then you will see that none of them were reviewed. The "Premier Acoustic" speaker review is the only actual review on the site.
Also, the comparison of dipole/monopole on hometheater.com didn't mention bipoles at all. Bipoles are different than dipoles. Bipoles radiate both sides in phase (both sets of drivers output the same signal) while dipoles radiate out of phase (front drivers are 180 degrees out of phase with the rear drivers). When people talk about how "diffuse" dipoles sound, that same statement is not necessarily applicable to bipoles. One cool feature of the Polk f/x series is a switch which can be flipped to change from dipole to bipole, depending on preferences, room setup, and program choice. Some other manufacturers do this too.
Really it kind of depends on how big your room is, how many rows of seating you have, etc. Ideally you would have more than one pair of side surrounds (dipoles), and more than one pair of rear surrounds (monopoles). But this all depends on how much money you have and how many people you are fitting into the room. In most movie theaters you will notice side-surrounds every couple of rows.
Size. Floorstanders have rubber feet (or carpet spikes) for standing on the floor. Tall enough (3-4 feet or so?) so that the tweeters are roughly at ear level when in a seated position. Typically nowadays they are in the "tower" configuration (tall and narrow), but older speakers were more boxy. Bookshelf speakers are smaller and not designed to sit on the floor but to be raised up somehow, on a shelf or a dedicated speaker stand. Typical bookshelf size might be 12"x8"x8"... maybe as big as 18" in the largest dimension. As far as sound goes, tower speakers are generally able to provide better/deeper bass due to having a larger internal volume and the capacity to fit more/bigger woofers. A typical floorstander might get down to 35-40Hz while a typical bookshelf might roll off in the 80-100Hz range. The very smallest speakers are typically called "satellites" and are designed to be paired with a sub, and they might roll off more around 200Hz. These are usually wall-mounted.
It was not an ideal situation, but the front L/R speakers were basically sitting right next to the TV due to the way way the whole TV niche was set up. I would have had to build a small cabinet/TV stand to raise the TV enough to place my center under it. But each L/R speaker was maybe 6" from the side of the 42" TV, so if I was sitting at a reasonable distance from the TV it just sounded as if the sound was coming from a center speaker.
Last edited:
Cool, thanks!
As far as the dipole thing goes, I was extrapolating from their results. With my surround speaker placement (couch against the wall, flanked by the surrounds, which would also be against the wall), I wouldn't be able to get the null zone. It seems like bipoles could still produce the diffuse effect, where direct speakers could be more of a distraction. I'd love to get switching surrounds, especially considering that this won't be their permanent home.
Honestly, my room isn't that big, but as I say, I'm planning on keeping these speakers around for a while. Keeping with the indecisive theme of the thread, I'm sure I'd be fine using 3.1 for now, and adding the surrounds later. It'd be nice to go straight to 5.1, but I recognize that I have more options.
As far as the dipole thing goes, I was extrapolating from their results. With my surround speaker placement (couch against the wall, flanked by the surrounds, which would also be against the wall), I wouldn't be able to get the null zone. It seems like bipoles could still produce the diffuse effect, where direct speakers could be more of a distraction. I'd love to get switching surrounds, especially considering that this won't be their permanent home.
Honestly, my room isn't that big, but as I say, I'm planning on keeping these speakers around for a while. Keeping with the indecisive theme of the thread, I'm sure I'd be fine using 3.1 for now, and adding the surrounds later. It'd be nice to go straight to 5.1, but I recognize that I have more options.
Another week, another change in the tide. I hit a couple boutique shops (the only two in town), and neither was able to accommodate my budget. The first place quoted a PSB Alpha line 3.1 system at $1300. The other place didn't give me a quote, but said that I could get a Paradigm Monitor 7 3.0 setup for ~$1000. Neither place had their speakers available to demo. The first place didn't have any floor models, and the second place was in the process of setting up their test rig.
Which sent me back to the drawing board. This time I threw my budget out the window, and came away with three 3.0 setups: Paradigm Monitor 9 w/ Center 3 ($1800), Monitor Audio RX6 w/ RX Centre ($1925), and PSB Image T6 w/ C4 ($1600). Each of these is MSRP (as near as I can tell, it was quite difficult to find prices for some of these speakers). I'm not anticipating paying retail, but it does serve as a comparison. I plan on buying the sub and surrounds separately, with the exception of the MA RX line, where I'd pick up the RXFX's to round out the set.
The main competition for this setup would be the Klipsch WF-35's with the WC-24 ($1360). I'm justifying the expense by considering that I'd keep any of the other three setups around longer than the Klipsch system, and much longer than a $1k system. I realize this is an unfair question, but does that seem like an accurate assessment?
Right now I'm reading up on these systems in more detail. I'll see what prices I can get on the PSB and Paradigm systems from the local stores, and I'll e-mail some out-of-town places on the Monitor Audio RX line. I've come a long way from the HTIB's where I started, and though my pocket-book is cursing the day I started this thread, I appreciate your help. Thank you.
Which sent me back to the drawing board. This time I threw my budget out the window, and came away with three 3.0 setups: Paradigm Monitor 9 w/ Center 3 ($1800), Monitor Audio RX6 w/ RX Centre ($1925), and PSB Image T6 w/ C4 ($1600). Each of these is MSRP (as near as I can tell, it was quite difficult to find prices for some of these speakers). I'm not anticipating paying retail, but it does serve as a comparison. I plan on buying the sub and surrounds separately, with the exception of the MA RX line, where I'd pick up the RXFX's to round out the set.
The main competition for this setup would be the Klipsch WF-35's with the WC-24 ($1360). I'm justifying the expense by considering that I'd keep any of the other three setups around longer than the Klipsch system, and much longer than a $1k system. I realize this is an unfair question, but does that seem like an accurate assessment?
Right now I'm reading up on these systems in more detail. I'll see what prices I can get on the PSB and Paradigm systems from the local stores, and I'll e-mail some out-of-town places on the Monitor Audio RX line. I've come a long way from the HTIB's where I started, and though my pocket-book is cursing the day I started this thread, I appreciate your help. Thank you.
Soccerman06
Diamond Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 5,830
- 5
- 81
The RX6 should be had for $1250 , Monitor 9 should be $1000, not sure about the T6 tho but it seems high. For towers only.
Edit: Pro reviews seem to love the BX and RX line from Monitor, more so than paradigm and psb. I havent had a chance to listen to the new stuff thats coming out in a few days, each of the 3 you listed are releasing a new model for each series. So you could get a previous model year cheaper if you wait till Christmas for all the products to be shipped and put in store as that is what Im planning to do.
Last edited:
Oh ye of little wisdom...
Right. But this doesn't mean anything for PaneInTheGlass, who is the one I wanted a response from. There are bookshelf speakers (more like studio monitors, but I digress) that have 10" or even 12" woofers, with bass response superior to many of today's narrow speakers with four 5" or even 6.5" midwoofers.
Soccerman06
Diamond Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 5,830
- 5
- 81
I'll entertain you. Why do you suppose it was a silly question?Hey you were the one who asked a silly question, not me
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter