|
 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
huggy
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Posts: 927
Location: Melbourne,Australia
|
 Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:03 am Post subject: What's the best bang for buck centre? |
 |
|
Well due to my downtime with my pj, I thought I'd try and improve upon other aspects of mt HT.I'm current using a boston accoustics VRB (I think) bookshelf for my centre,but find I have to crank it up to hear dialogue clearly.In turn this makes action scenes, especially loud explosions, unbearably loud.
I'm happy with my fronts and rears but think I really need to sink some coin in a good centre between 1 and 2k,preferably 1.
So what say ya'll?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 17860
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kal's right. The better your LCR's match in their sound (timbre), the better integrated and seamless the front sound stage. I'd try Kal's suggestion first and try to find an identical (or near-identical - same manufacturer/drivers) match to your mains.
It may seem obvious (or not), but positioning is also critical. If you don't have an AT screen, then immediately below the screen is usually better than above, and a slight up-angle toward the listening position usually provides flatter (on-axis) response. Even a few inches higher and 5 or 10 degrees of tilt can make a huge difference, depending on your speaker's off-axis response.
I don't know that you even have to spend a grand to get a good-sound center, unless of course you're matching your existing mains. I'm using relatively inexpensive mains (<$350/ea retail) and I have no problem at all with dialog intelligibility.
I'm also wondering about the noise floor in your room. An elevated noise floor will have exactly the effect you're talking about: You have to crank it up during the quiet parts to hear the dialog, but then the loud parts are too loud. Do you have you projector in a hush box? Any other fans or equipment in the room you can relocate or quiet down?
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | Whatever matches the tonality of your fronts. Ideally a speaker identical to your fronts.
Kal |
A-fricken-men!
My center is a true "center" speaker made by the same company as my mains. They are from the same line and tonally matched. Most of the time the soundstage is coherent. But, since the tonality of the center is not EXACTLY the same as the mains, on the rare pan from main to center or vice versa of a sound--especially a voice--an astute listener will detect a slight tonality difference.
Next house it is three identical speakers for L/C/R for me.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | Kal's right. The better your LCR's match in their sound (timbre), the better integrated and seamless the front sound stage. I'd try Kal's suggestion first and try to find an identical (or near-identical - same manufacturer/drivers) match to your mains. |
See my post, drivers and same line are not enough,
| ecrabb wrote: | | It may seem obvious (or not), but positioning is also critical. If you don't have an AT screen, then immediately below the screen is usually better than above, and a slight up-angle toward the listening position usually provides flatter (on-axis) response. Even a few inches higher and 5 or 10 degrees of tilt can make a huge difference, depending on your speaker's off-axis response. |
I agree with the tilt.
However, humans localize sound that originate below our ear level than above our ear level. So a center mounted above the screen will be less localizable than one below the screen.
So above is better unless it is WAAAAY above the R and L then the soundstage is disturbed. So if below is like 10 " below ear level and above is like 40" above ear level, then below is better, but as a general rule, above is better if you can make it work.
| ecrabb wrote: | I don't know that you even have to spend a grand to get a good-sound center, unless of course you're matching your existing mains. I'm using relatively inexpensive mains (<$350/ea retail) and I have no problem at all with dialog intelligibility.
I'm also wondering about the noise floor in your room. An elevated noise floor will have exactly the effect you're talking about: You have to crank it up during the quiet parts to hear the dialog, but then the loud parts are too loud. Do you have you projector in a hush box? Any other fans or equipment in the room you can relocate or quiet down?
SC |
It could be noise floor but it could also be first reflections. Both you and I have killed our first reflections. First reflections come too close to the direct sound for the brain to perceive it as an echo, so they get blended into a garbled mess. That garbled mess is easier to understand if it is louder.
For my two cents, if ineligibility is the problem, kill the first reflection and turn off you PJ and see how bad it is. If it is great, you've found your problem(s).
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One last thing, IMO, "average" speakers in a well configured room (sound treatments, etc) sound better than "great" speakers in a poorly configured room.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One last, one last thing. 
Speaker quality is way over rated and focused on too much. Amp quality is more important.
Take an average amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
Take a great amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
But compare the average amp to average speakers to a great amp with average speakers--night and friggen' day!
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24303
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | One last, one last thing.
Speaker quality is way over rated and focused on too much. Amp quality is more important.
Take an average amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
Take a great amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
But compare the average amp to average speakers to a great amp with average speakers--night and friggen' day! |
Hey, I get to fight with Dave again! 
I completely disagree with the above statements.
10 brands of $500 speakers will sound completely different from one another.
10 brands of 100 watt per channel amps will sound almost identical.
Now, signal processing when compared do sound different from each other. Each one I've had seems to process the surround info differently, but in my two statements above, I'm talking strictly about the power amp section of an AV receiver.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | | Person99 wrote: | One last, one last thing.
Speaker quality is way over rated and focused on too much. Amp quality is more important.
Take an average amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
Take a great amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
But compare the average amp to average speakers to a great amp with average speakers--night and friggen' day! |
Hey, I get to fight with Dave again!
I completely disagree with the above statements.
10 brands of $500 speakers will sound completely different from one another.
10 brands of 100 watt per channel amps will sound almost identical.
Now, signal processing when compared do sound different from each other. Each one I've had seems to process the surround info differently, but in my two statements above, I'm talking strictly about the power amp section of an AV receiver. |
OK, I'm not sure if you are disagreeing. I didn't say that the speakers would sound the same. I was talking about quality deltas.
Basically, I'm focused on two cases:
Case 1) Hook a mid priced AVR up to a "good" speaker (Axiom, Energy mid line, etc). Now, hook up those same speakers to a great amp (which will of course have more power). The sound will be MUCH better with the great amp even though it is the same mid-line speakers.
Case 2) OK, take that mid priced AVR and "good" speakers compare them to the mid priced AVR and some "great" speakers (of similar design--i.e. don't compare electrostatic to non, etc) that cost 3 or more times as much. The difference will not be nearly as big as the difference in case 1.
I've done this--actually a couple of times. Every time, Case 2 sounds better. So, basically with the same money you can either:
1) Buy a mid-priced AVR and great speakers, or
2) Buy mid-priced speakers and great amps
I think number 2 is a much better investment and sounds better. Do you disagree with that?
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Curt... I agree with Dave for the most part. What he was getting at was that assuming you have decent-quality speakers, going to a better amp will often have a much more profound impact on the sound than spending a fortune to buy more expensive speakers and continuing to use the same amp. I would say amplifier power is an often-overlooked and very under-rated important part of an HT system - ESPECIALLY if you have decent speakers and a treated room.
Yes, 10 brands of 100 WPC amps will sound nearly identical, but what about going from a 100WPC amp in an AVR to a 300WPC separate amp? That's essentially what I did, and it's some of the best money I've spent on my whole system. It made my system come alive. I can honestly say it took my system from just a good sounding system to an outstanding one - especially for the money I spent.
In short, my system with the amps SMOKES my system before I had the amps. There is no comparison - especially in "demo" mode  , but even at normal, healthy listening levels.
For under $900 - less than the price of maybe a set of good L and R mains - I got three 300WPC (into my 4-ohm speakers) Crown amps. My system will play clean to 105dB+, now. I never measured it before, I know it wasn't as clean at just over normal loud listening levels as my system is now at 100+ db.
Combine that with the $450 I spent on basic treatments for first reflections, and the improvement over the AVR-powered system in the untreated room was just massive. Acoustic absorption panels can be built DIY from scratch for FAR less than I spent on my manufactured panels. Considering how inexpensively it can be done, there's really no good excuse for not having at least basic treatments.
There are two things I'll never be without again in a dedicated HT: Acoustic treatments and separate amplifiers.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24303
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah OK, gotcha. Speed reading and spewing drivel about the buy/sell section threw me.
No, you're right, we pretty much are in agreement then..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: |
There are two things I'll never be without again in a dedicated HT: Acoustic treatments and separate amplifiers.
SC |
DIT-EFFING-TO!
But, to build on SC's comments. I think you can get a VERY nice bump in sound if you have an AVR simply by putting seperate amps to power the front three speakers. These get most of the action and it gives the amp much more headroom for the surround duties.
Every friend I have the has decent speakers hooked to an AVR that is thinking about upgrading the speakers--I emplore them to try powering the front three separately with a great amp.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | I think you can get a VERY nice bump in sound if you have an AVR simply by putting seperate amps to power the front three speakers. These get most of the action and it gives the amp much more headroom for the surround duties. |
Absolutely. That's what I did first. Two 2-channel amps for less than the cost most mid-range AVR upgrades, and WAY more power than even a high-end AVR.
Could have been psychological or a slight level mismatch, but I swear my surrounds got more detailed and crisper, more dynamic, after I went to the third amp and moved the surrounds off the AVR.
Huge bang for the buck just amping the mains, though.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | So above is better unless it is WAAAAY above the R and L then the soundstage is disturbed. So if below is like 10 " below ear level and above is like 40" above ear level, then below is better, but as a general rule, above is better if you can make it work. |
"If" being the operative... Yes, above is better if you can pull it off. But, hardly anybody can. Most people's screens are much closer to the ceiling than the floor, making spacing tight and the potential for first reflections a problem (the floor is often carpeted and the ceiling often gyp). I've got about 27" below my screen, but less than 12" above. My center would have been really tight, and would have forced me to put a giant absorber on the ceiling. Plus, it would have been much further above my ears at the ceiling, than it is below my ears at the bottom of the screen, and a little further out of plane with the mains.
I would think, unless you have taller than 8-foot ceilings or are running CIH/scope, more people than not would be space-constrained at the top of the screen like I am.
Can't wait until some day when I have the room to do a nice, big CIH AT screen and have ALL the speakers right behind the screen. 
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: |
I would think, unless you have taller than 8-foot ceilings or are running CIH/scope, more people than not would be space-constrained at the top of the screen like I am.
Can't wait until some day when I have the room to do a nice, big CIH AT screen and have ALL the speakers right behind the screen.
SC |
As an FYI, my ceilings are 10' in the current theater, but the center is below because it works better. I was just saying... 
As for big AT screen--good luck! I would love an AT screen with all the speakers behind it. Problem is, we sit far closer to the screens than in commercial theaters. AT screens (including weaves) do not look as good to me as non-AT screens in HT. I wish they did--I REALLY wish they did. But I've yet to see an AT screen that bests a simple piece of laminate.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | But I've yet to see an AT screen that bests a simple piece of laminate. |
True, true. Not to mention the sizable wallet dent. I haven't seen SMX (or the supposed equivalent) in person, so I don't know how it compares. The only AT screen I've seen up close was Art's megabuck Stewart (which looked awesome at that size and 10'-plus viewing distance) and a couple more Stewart Cineperfs at a local dealer, which I wasn't that thrilled with - especially since the screen and masking setup probably cost as much as my entire theater and then some.
The Wilsonart bang-for-buck is hard to beat.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5321
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | One last, one last thing.
Speaker quality is way over rated and focused on too much. Amp quality is more important.
Take an average amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
Take a great amp and hook it up to great speakers then to average speakers--not much difference.
But compare the average amp to average speakers to a great amp with average speakers--night and friggen' day! |
Amp quality and amp power are different. Going from 100WPC to 300WPC will have a big impact due to the headroom.
Going from a cheap JVC 100WPC to a Marantz 100WPC should sound identical given that the power ratings are accurate.
This is in my experience anyway.
I went from 55WPC to 500WPC in the front (don't even come close to using it) and it was night and day different. But I don't imagine switching brands at 500WPC would be noticable...as long as they were both equally power rated.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRT_Ben
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 1684
Location: Northern Virginia
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| greg_mitch wrote: |
Amp quality and amp power are different. Going from 100WPC to 300WPC will have a big impact due to the headroom.
Going from a cheap JVC 100WPC to a Marantz 100WPC should sound identical given that the power ratings are accurate.
This is in my experience anyway.
I went from 55WPC to 500WPC in the front (don't even come close to using it) and it was night and day different. But I don't imagine switching brands at 500WPC would be noticable...as long as they were both equally power rated. |
Greg, in black and white terms I agree with what you're saying, but more often there are other factors.
Take your 100W amps - a cheapie JVC, and a Marantz. At 1kHz, maybe they have the same WPC and the same THD. However the Marantz probably has a much more robust power supply, bigger caps, etc. that will show up in low frequency reproduction and punch.
Therein lies one of the biggest keys to amplifier performance - power supply(ies), the downfall of most every receiver ever made. My smallest amps are Adcom GFA-535s, 100W/Ch into 4 ohms, and they have separate power supplies for each channel. I guarantee you they would wipe the floor with almost every receiver on the market, no matter what the power rating, because with all channels driven the receiver has one single piss-poor anemic power supply that just can't keep up. Meanwhile the Adcoms are cruising along with all the power they need.
What I do agree with is that all quality SS amps sound pretty much the same. SC's crowns probably sound the same as my Adcoms probably sound the same as the Marantz discussed above. Once you're into the quality bracket, I don't think there's any benefit to audiofool SS amps because I think prosound amps can do the job just as well. One exception to this is the protection circuits built into prosound amps can sometimes lower the sound quality.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4901
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What Ben said.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg_mitch
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 5321
|
| Link Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
if the power supply is so bad that it affects the sound quality, more than likely it isnt producing all 100wpc. so yes i agree that is different. i think we are all agreeing essentially and not really helping the OP.
get three identical speakers is my opinion.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Photo Albums
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
