Speaker Recommendations

[JackBurton]

To that point as well, as many 5.1 setups as we all have seen, have you noticed how poorly setup each is? Things like Audyssey can help to a degree, but most people basically put their rear sounds wherever they look hidden (WAF).

So much in fact, that I had to look up information and call some speaker companies to get exact directions of where speakers should go in a 7.1 setup. I thought I knew what I was doing, but seeing so many varying placements of 5.1 makes it confusing.

Yep. Quite honestly, sometimes it is just tough to arrange a 5.1 system let a alone a 7.1 system in something like a living room. What you'll most often see are people shoving rear channels where they are not supposed to be because they can't properly place them in their space. That's a pet peeve of mine and to that I would say, if you can't fit a 5.1 system in your room properly, just get a great 2 or 2.1 system. 2 or 2.1 systems can sound AMAZING, but then you can't brag to your friends you have 80 speakers in your room.

 

[Durvelle27]

for my room since its a decent size its easy to arrange a 5.1 setup

 

[007ELmO]

I had a 2.2 system for a while, then 2.1 for most of my theater so far. I'm reluctantly going 7.1 as I build my theater room out. Check IMDB, there are VERY few movies that actually support 7.1 (or even 6.1!). You would be surprised. Now the thing is, people think they can actually process and create better surround with 7.1 (when encoded as 5.1). That may or may not be true, but I like maintaining purity in what the director intended us to hear and see.

 

[sdifox]

I had a 2.2 system for a while, then 2.1 for most of my theater so far. I'm reluctantly going 7.1 as I build my theater room out. Check IMDB, there are VERY few movies that actually support 7.1 (or even 6.1!). You would be surprised. Now the thing is, people think they can actually process and create better surround with 7.1 (when encoded as 5.1). That may or may not be true, but I like maintaining purity in what the director intended us to hear and see.

is your theatre being built to THX spec?

 

[007ELmO]

is your theatre being built to THX spec?

Nope. I wouldn't even know where to begin with that. But I have double studded the wall frames to help contain acoustics. I will be doing some other acoustical treatments after the room is complete, I'm still in the wiring phase.

This crap costs way too much time and money to do right, it's not worth it.

By purity, I meant (for example) not turning a 2 channel movie into 5 channels (exaggeration), or zooming in aspect ratios for video.

 

[Durvelle27]

2.1 isn't for me

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I will loan you $150. If you can pay it back in the next couple of months, maybe you can buy a used 5.1 set like the Energy take series.

IMO for $200 you should buy just 2 OK mains and get the rest later. I ran with 2 high quality mains (and no center, rear channels) in a setup that featured a $10,000 projector for years, and nobody complained (my friends/viewers, or myself). 5.1 can be overrated, especially on a budget.

In my experience - I like to spend 1/4th of my speaker budget on a receiver. The rest is majority on the subwoofer/front mains, then the center/surrounds.

So if you will eventually work with $1000, $250 on receiver. $300 on a subwoofer, $500 or so on the speakers.

Maybe you're more of an audiophile than am I. In the '60s and '70s, I had college friends who had ample parental subsidy, and -- as with the Duesenberry Relative Income Hypothesis -- hungered for a decent sound system after graduation. But for the rooms in which I might install it, I don't think I ever spent more than $1,500 on an entire system.

Speaker system prices seem "loosey-goosey" to me. Part of it seems to be "The Solid-Gold Cadillac Effect" -- I can't rightly say. But there seems to be a wide spread between MSRP and late-in-the-year markdowns on speaker systems. I can't trust the "get-what-you-pay-for" logic associated with recent product release MSRP's or initially priced at $800 -- to see it marked down to $300 a year later.

Also, I knew people who would get excessive power-handling capacity for the amp/receiver's output, on the idea that the tonal quality [and weight of the magnets] would be better. Now I see advice toward amp/receiver capacity that exceeds the speaker capacity by 10%. Supposedly most decent speakers are capable of handling a 10% excess, and the receiver doesn't have to work as hard.

 

[Durvelle27]

what about these

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-SS-V13...s=63&clkid=8945750378857876905#ht_1169wt_1163

 

[007ELmO]

Maybe you're more of an audiophile than am I. In the '60s and '70s, I had college friends who had ample parental subsidy, and -- as with the Duesenberry Relative Income Hypothesis -- hungered for a decent sound system after graduation. But for the rooms in which I might install it, I don't think I ever spent more than $1,500 on an entire system.

Speaker system prices seem "loosey-goosey" to me. Part of it seems to be "The Solid-Gold Cadillac Effect" -- I can't rightly say. But there seems to be a wide spread between MSRP and late-in-the-year markdowns on speaker systems. I can't trust the "get-what-you-pay-for" logic associated with recent product release MSRP's or initially priced at $800 -- to see it marked down to $300 a year later.

Also, I knew people who would get excessive power-handling capacity for the amp/receiver's output, on the idea that the tonal quality [and weight of the magnets] would be better. Now I see advice toward amp/receiver capacity that exceeds the speaker capacity by 10%. Supposedly most decent speakers are capable of handling a 10% excess, and the receiver doesn't have to work as hard.

I've tried speakers up to $4000, and some of the best speakers I've heard are in the $600-1000 range. You begin to expect too much for your money at higher ranges and/or they simply don't actually sound as good as the cheaper ones.

I've always read your amplifier should exceed your speakers wattage, so they can be driven fully/cleanly if necessary (not the other way around).

Most of my systems are in the $1500 range, $500 subwoofer, $1000 speaker set.

 

[kornphlake]

what about these

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-SS-V13...s=63&clkid=8945750378857876905#ht_1169wt_1163

Those speakers will get the job done, but I'll restate what others have already said, 2 good speakers (or as good as you can get within your budget) will sound better than 5 not good speakers. I'd actually recommend these speakers assuming the auction ends at $10, at that price they're practically disposable, once you've got the budget for better speakers it won't be a big deal to toss them in the garbage, in your budget it won't really matter much if you're spending $10 for 5 speakers or $50 for 2 speakers, either way you're buying the lowest quality speakers.

 

[Durvelle27]

yea these will just hold be out till the next 2 monthsthan i'll have budget of $600 for speakers and so on ?

 

[007ELmO]

yea these will just hold be out till the next 2 monthsthan i'll have budget of $600 for speakers and so on ?

Not too bad if you don't mind the $50 loss. $600 is a very good budget for speakers.

 

[slayernine]

Best speakers I've ever owned, they sound good even when they are ridiculously loud.

http://www.klipsch.com/promedia-2-1-computer-speakers

 

[007ELmO]

You may like Klipsch, it is a horn speaker. He does want 5.1 right now though (difficult for $50). Horn speakers are typically pretty sensitive, but you may or may not like their sound. They almost all get loud clearly.

 

[Durvelle27]

007ELmO read my post with the ebay link

 

[sdifox]

yea these will just hold be out till the next 2 monthsthan i'll have budget of $600 for speakers and so on ?

just wait. 2 months is not a long time. I waited a year...

 

[007ELmO]

I have waited 2 years while I'm still constructing my basement. We all learn patience, but I am an extremely impatient human being. If I want a TV, I need to find it in a brick and mortar store today and make them price match online. If not, I am sad. But for equipment, we all learn we are actually wasting money if we do not purchase the hardware we originally wanted, I do not like to compromise, who does in life. I'm glad I'm not married (yet).

Durvelle that will work fine, if you can win it for under $50, and you are OK with losing $50 for the next few months until you have $600 for your actual speakers.

 

[sdifox]

Nope. I wouldn't even know where to begin with that. But I have double studded the wall frames to help contain acoustics. I will be doing some other acoustical treatments after the room is complete, I'm still in the wiring phase.

This crap costs way too much time and money to do right, it's not worth it.

By purity, I meant (for example) not turning a 2 channel movie into 5 channels (exaggeration), or zooming in aspect ratios for video.

Did you at least try for golden ratio? 1:1.618:1.618 HWL?

 

[sdifox]

I have waited 2 years while I'm still constructing my basement. We all learn patience, but I am an extremely impatient human being. If I want a TV, I need to find it in a brick and mortar store today and make them price match online. If not, I am sad. But for equipment, we all learn we are actually wasting money if we do not purchase the hardware we originally wanted, I do not like to compromise, who does in life. I'm glad I'm not married (yet).

Durvelle that will work fine, if you can win it for under $50, and you are OK with losing $50 for the next few months until you have $600 for your actual speakers.

losing 8.3% of your budget for something that lasts 15 years because you couldn't wait two months is a bad thing.

 

[Durvelle27]

just wait. 2 months is not a long time. I waited a year...

i'm very impatient when i got my tv i couldn't wait. so i need some to hold me over till then

 

[007ELmO]

losing 8.3% of your budget for something that lasts 15 years because you couldn't wait two months is a bad thing.

yes true, but comon now son who keeps their speakers that long (and also browse these here forums, xD).

 

[007ELmO]

Did you at least try for golden ratio? 1:1.618:1.618 HWL?

A room should not be square, so I do not know of the golden ratio. I typically build rooms that are longer than wide, which this new theater room is not.

I am building an HT room (14ft wide screen, 2.37 aspect ratio - the room is not great though, probably 15x15), and a 3D HT room (which is 17ft back and 12-13ft wide). I think the 3D HT room is going to be better aesthetically.

I don't care, once the lights are off if the audio is decent, I"m happy.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

A room should not be square, so I do not know of the golden ratio. I typically build rooms that are longer than wide, which this new theater room is not.

I am building an HT room (14ft wide screen, 2.37 aspect ratio - the room is not great though, probably 15x15), and a 3D HT room (which is 17ft back and 12-13ft wide). I think the 3D HT room is going to be better aesthetically.

I don't care, once the lights are off if the audio is decent, I"m happy.

In our "happy townhome association," the jag-off architect who built these places 40 years ago made all sorts of irregular design decisions. For instance, the "room" where I have my HT and TV is part of an L-shaped enclosure -- part of it being a dining room at a higher, "two-steps-worth" elevation. The living-room area is over-stuffed with furniture. If I mounted one front speaker in a corner, I'd either have to mount the other on the ceiling (since there's no wall there) -- or mount it back in the dining area.

So I just . . . . make do . . . and hope the Onkyo Audyssey calibration makes things work at their best. As for the architect-builder: sumb**** was later charged with a crime and fled to Mexico. As much as his demise titillates me, I have to live with this place as it is.

 

[kornphlake]

So you expected the architect to design a home with a home theater in mind about 25 years before home theater equipment was available to consumers?

 

[sdifox]

A room should not be square, so I do not know of the golden ratio. I typically build rooms that are longer than wide, which this new theater room is not.

I am building an HT room (14ft wide screen, 2.37 aspect ratio - the room is not great though, probably 15x15), and a 3D HT room (which is 17ft back and 12-13ft wide). I think the 3D HT room is going to be better aesthetically.

I don't care, once the lights are off if the audio is decent, I"m happy.

15/1.618~=9.3ft, just make sure your ceiling is about that and you are at golden ratio