Mid to High End Home Theater System

[rshad0000]

I'm in the market for a good home theater / music system.

I plan on putting this system in to a large game room--roughly 20 x 40-- and I like to listen to music as much as watching movies.

Is there really such a thing as a speaker that plays movies as well as music well?

I currently have a B&W700 series system with a B&K ref 50 processor, Rotel Amps. I really like the system, but I do not think the B&W speakers do well with movies or Rock n Roll type music(I do think they are excellent with Jazz, Classical and soft rock, though).

Does anyone have any good recommendations on a system that plays movies very well but is also musical? Does such a thing even exist?

I have been saving for while and I am willing to pay for good speakers. I will probably stick with my current processor and amplifiers for the time being, but I am open to recommendations for these as well.

[PeruvianSkies]

Well, I hate to be a constant promoter of PSB, but I am not the only person who really rallies them when it comes to music and movie playback. They are certainly one of the few companies (especially with a few price tiers) that can deliver on various levels. Do you have a budget in mind???

Are you planning to replace all of your speakers? More details please.

[rshad0000]

Thanks. I would love to hear some PSB speakers. I have certainly heard a lot of good things about them. It is tough to find a dealer that has some in its show room.

Yes. I plan on replacing all of my speakers including the subwoofer. I have $15k to speand and plan on keeping the speakers a long time. I want to make sure I make the right choice.

So far I have auditioned Dali, Paradigm, B&W, and Klipsch. All have their strengths and weaknesses. The Dali Helicon 800 seemed to handle movies and music pretty well overall. Very quick speakers.

[musicman1999]

For 15k you owe yourself a listen to Focal-JM Labs Profile series.They are very musical speakers,I have not heard them in a home theatre set but they should be excellent.Concentrate on musical speakers,if they excel at music they should do movie soundtracks well.

bill

[westcott]

I would listen to the high end Revels with your budget. I love B&W so maybe their higher line is worth another look. Revel uses the same National Research Council resources in Canada as PSB if that makes any difference to you. I would even give Revel the slight nod over PSB, but just slight.

[DEVO]

Listen to some Logan's

Vista's---front's
Cinema---center
Scripts---rears
Depthi--sub

=smokin'

For your size of room and existing equipment. These will sound very nice...at least audition them!

[PeruvianSkies]

Well,

For 15K you can probably do better than my first thought with PSB, but now you have opened yourself up to a whole new area of hi-fi. It's more likely that you are going to find some great 2-channel systems for 15K, but it's hard to find the while 5.1 package.

[GMichael]

How about a set of these?

[bobsticks]

I have been saving for while and I am willing to pay for good speakers. I will probably stick with my current processor and amplifiers for the time being, but I am open to recommendations for these as well.

I think you owe it to yourself to audition some Dynaudios as well. Everyone talks about mating B&Ws with Rotel but I listened to a Dane/Rotel combo in a large room that shamed any variation of the previous two--great soundstage, strong top without the sizzle, solid mids and enough bass. I truly felt that it would take a sizeable increase on the amp stage ($$$) to see any real improvement.

For 15K you could go top-of-the-line for the fronts and center with a couple of the Audience line as rears and still have enough for a quality sub and a few discs.

Peace

[rshad0000]

Thanks Guys!

These are all great options! I plan on hunting the internet this weekend for local dealers and see what I can find to audition. I will probably give B&W another try and check out the B&W803Ds--three 7 inch woofers has to add more bass and slam than my 703s have.

The only thing I did not see come up was Krell. Surprisly a lot of dealers in my area of dropped Krell. Any opinions on whether or not these are worth checking out?

[DEVO]

One of the best speakers in the high end market. But usually very expensive.

[musicman1999]

[QUOTE=rshad0000]Thanks Guys!

These are all great options! I plan on hunting the internet this weekend for local dealers and see what I can find to audition. I will probably give B&W another try and check out the B&W803Ds--three 7 inch woofers has to add more bass and slam than my 703s have.

What do you use for a sub?Is bass response your only issue with your current set up?Have you looked into speaker placement or room treatments?Perhaps a second sub is what is needed,you do have a big room there.

bill

[PeruvianSkies]

Here is a price breakdown of what a PSB 5.1 setup would be ...

PSB Platinum T8 towers: $6,000
PSB Platinum C4 center: $1500
PSB Platinum M2 surrounds: $1500
PSB Subseries 10 subwoofer $2000

This would put you at $11,000 given that you can get these at this price, I marked these at around $500 less than MSRP. If you were paying premium price for these than you are looking at around $13,500, which is not really much less than what you had in mind for an entire system.

[Luvin Da Blues]

Here is a price breakdown of what a PSB 5.1 setup would be ...

PSB Platinum T8 towers: $6,000
PSB Platinum C4 center: $1500
PSB Platinum M2 surrounds: $1500
PSB Subseries 10 subwoofer $2000

This would put you at $11,000 given that you can get these at this price, I marked these at around $500 less than MSRP. If you were paying premium price for these than you are looking at around $13,500, which is not really much less than what you had in mind for an entire system.

:thumbsup: and a few pesos left over for cables and room treatments. :cornut:

[Mr Peabody]

For what you want, listening to both movies and music, you need neutral speakers. Dynaudio are the apitomy of neutral. Actually, it sounds like you have the room for most any Dynaudio but they did carry a Contour t2.5 & matching t2.1 center that was especially made for your purpose. Yours truly just happens to own those and I have been very happy with them. I use a pair of Audience 52's in the rear. A pair of 52se's would probably be better if I wanted to spend the money. Dynaudio has a center channel for whatever level you like. I've used my t2.5's with Krell, Conrad Johnson, Linn & Arcam, they have been exceptional with them all. It's because Dyn's are neutral, if you have good electronics to push them, you get good sound.

I have heard the Krell speakers compared to Dynaudio and my opinion the Dynaudio costing much less, sounded better. I could say the same of many comparisons to Dynaudio with other brands though. Our Krell dealer does not carry their speakers. In my opinion they are over priced for what the are. The pair I heard the most was Krell's $10k bookshelf with Krell gear. I thought it was extremely bright on the high end which gave it an unnatural presentation and overall unbalanced. These are characteristics I don't think should exist in a speaker costing $10k. For this money you could get into the Dynaudio Confidence series which would kill the Krell without a fight. Our dealer almost lost Krell over the decision not to carry their speakers but they knew they wouldn't sell any as long as they kept Dynaudio and they weren't about to lose Dyn. Even if you did enjoy the Krell speakers, they are certainly a mismatch with the Rotel amps.

If you want to hang on to your amp for awhile I'd think Rotel would be fine for correctly matched Dynaudio speakers.

[rshad0000]

[QUOTE=rshad0000]Thanks Guys!

These are all great options! I plan on hunting the internet this weekend for local dealers and see what I can find to audition. I will probably give B&W another try and check out the B&W803Ds--three 7 inch woofers has to add more bass and slam than my 703s have.

What do you use for a sub?Is bass response your only issue with your current set up?Have you looked into speaker placement or room treatments?Perhaps a second sub is what is needed,you do have a big room there.

bill


I have a ASW750 that seems to do a pretty good job. I have heard that two subs are always better than one. Things seem a litte bit muddy so placement and room treatments would help. I just think that B&W is not what I am looking for in a HT, though. I plan on listening to some the 800 series, though.

[rshad0000]

For what you want, listening to both movies and music, you need neutral speakers. Dynaudio are the apitomy of neutral. Actually, it sounds like you have the room for most any Dynaudio but they did carry a Contour t2.5 & matching t2.1 center that was especially made for your purpose. Yours truly just happens to own those and I have been very happy with them. I use a pair of Audience 52's in the rear. A pair of 52se's would probably be better if I wanted to spend the money. Dynaudio has a center channel for whatever level you like. I've used my t2.5's with Krell, Conrad Johnson, Linn & Arcam, they have been exceptional with them all. It's because Dyn's are neutral, if you have good electronics to push them, you get good sound.

I have heard the Krell speakers compared to Dynaudio and my opinion the Dynaudio costing much less, sounded better. I could say the same of many comparisons to Dynaudio with other brands though. Our Krell dealer does not carry their speakers. In my opinion they are over priced for what the are. The pair I heard the most was Krell's $10k bookshelf with Krell gear. I thought it was extremely bright on the high end which gave it an unnatural presentation and overall unbalanced. These are characteristics I don't think should exist in a speaker costing $10k. For this money you could get into the Dynaudio Confidence series which would kill the Krell without a fight. Our dealer almost lost Krell over the decision not to carry their speakers but they knew they wouldn't sell any as long as they kept Dynaudio and they weren't about to lose Dyn. Even if you did enjoy the Krell speakers, they are certainly a mismatch with the Rotel amps.

If you want to hang on to your amp for awhile I'd think Rotel would be fine for correctly matched Dynaudio speakers.

Your comments on a neutral sounding speaker sound dead on for what I am looking for. The Dali Helicon 800s I listened to were very neutral sounding and sound good with music and excellent with movies. I don't really expect one speaker to do it all, but, if I am going to spend the money, I want one that will do everything well.

I will listen to the Dynas.

It sounds like you have a lot of experience with amps and Dyna. What amp do you think sounds the best with them? Krell? I like the looks of Bryston, but I have never heard one(although I did listen to a Lexicon and I think Bryston builds Lexicon.)

Thanks!

[Mr Peabody]

Most high quality amps will sound good with the Dyn's, it depends on what type of sound you like. Amps like Krell, Bryston or Arcam that have the current seem to do best if you want fast, dynamic and controlled sound. Krell and Dyn really are a knock out punch for good bass and dynamic transcients.

A set up I used to use is a Krell integrated which has a "theater through" feature to allow the power section to be used as a slave for the front 2 channels of a receiver or processor. This lets you have high quality stereo and not having to go as much for HT. This is just an alternative to having a HT processor and multi-channel amp.

[pixelthis]

How about a set of these?
You been smelling you're own far-er, fumes again?
No way is music and movies compatible, but beemers are the best compromise, after a year and a half of klipsch, which did movies really great I've gone back to B&W 600
series, they are just more musical.
Two things you can do, get a front pair of grt music speakers, and match em as good as you can with surrounds,
OR get a seperate music system, which you can do quite cheaply
KEX, one of the crazies on this site has a grt link, av123.com, all kinds of cheap crap
that looks really cool at a cheap price, dont know how they sound tho:1:

[Mr Peabody]

There's no reason why the same speaker can't be used for both music and movies unless it was colored to emphasize one area or the other of music or movie playback. A good speaker should be neutral anyway which should allow for good results with either.

[rshad0000]

I listened to the Dyna and Dalis this weekend on Krells amps. I must admit that I was very impressed with the Krell amps...very dynamic, clean, but also expensive.

The Dyna Countour S5.4. Sounded good and really seemed to rock. I was not too impressed with the tweeter being so low to the floor, though. I'm use to the B&W sound with the tweeter on top creating a large soundstage. Overall a very good speaker with movies and music.

The Dalis Helicon 800s were a tad bit more musical than the Dyna's but did not have quite as much punch. I listened to the Euphonia MS5 as well, but IMO the Helicon 800s sounded much better. The MS5 were almost harsh sounding. Plus the Helicon's were $5000 cheaper. Gotta love that! Very good with movies as well.

Next on my list is PSB, Focal, and Sonus Faber...If I can hunt down a showroom that has them.

[westcott]

Here is some general information on Harman International and Revel, if they are still in the running. The laser photo of cone deflection is a real eye opener.

Harman International Interview (http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_2/feature-interview-kevin-voecks-4-2004.html)

[rshad0000]

Thanks...I love the looks of Revel; especially the new Ultima2. I can't afford those, but I do plan on listening to some of the mid price models.

[pixelthis]

There's no reason why the same speaker can't be used for both music and movies unless it was colored to emphasize one area or the other of music or movie playback. A good speaker should be neutral anyway which should allow for good results with either.
In a perfect world.
But a lot of people are creating "home theater" systems that are geared towards
HT. And the demands of a HT are quite different from audio.
For instance in a HT system the center channel is the most important speaker, the left front and right are really just "effects" speakers, but they are the major players in an audio system

[drseid]

So far I have auditioned Dali, Paradigm, B&W, and Klipsch. All have their strengths and weaknesses. The Dali Helicon 800 seemed to handle movies and music pretty well overall. Very quick speakers.

I liked the Helicon800s *plenty* when I heard them too and feel you can't go wrong with those... They are some of the better ones out there, IMO. You may want to also consider a brand like Legacy Audio (their Focus is a killer rock speaker, for example).

---Dave

[drseid]

The Dalis Helicon 800s were a tad bit more musical than the Dyna's but did not have quite as much punch. I listened to the Euphonia MS5 as well, but IMO the Helicon 800s sounded much better. The MS5 were almost harsh sounding. Plus the Helicon's were $5000 cheaper. Gotta love that! Very good with movies as well.


Hah, so I have now found someone else who agrees with me on this point... I too found the Helicon800s better than the Euphonia MS5s when I heard them on the same day side by side. People have told me I am crazy, but to me there really was no comparison, and as you rightly point out, the Helicons are *much* less expensive.

---Dave

[PeruvianSkies]

For instance in a HT system the center channel is the most important speaker, the left front and right are really just "effects" speakers, but they are the major players in an audio system

Wrong again. You can't really determine which speaker is 'MOST' important because all speakers in a 5.1 system need to be calibrated in such a way that they are working together to give a full experience. It's really a bit misleading for you to say that the left and right are 'effects' speakers. The front 3 speakers (LCR) should perform together to create a front soundfield, all 3 are working together in unison together, which is like asking which leg on a tripod is the more important one?

[Quagmire]

Agree and disagree. Generally, when I've been asked about creating systems which do HT and Stereo "equally well", I explain to people that it isn't really possible. I've long said that the needs of HT and audio (Stereo) are different and as such, optimizing a setup for one purpose (format) means making compromises to the other. For instance, I agree that the front three speakers in an HT setup should ideally be creating a seamless soundfield, but I also understand your point about not relying on the front two speakers to "image" and create the entire musical soundstage -- front to back and side to side -- all on their own as you would expect out of speakers in a quality stereo rig.

What is optimal for stereo music listening -- from the dispersion pattern of the speakers, to the "liveness" of the room, to critical placement of speakers relative to room boundaries and the "sweet spot" -- is contrary to what is optimal for HT which is accomplished instead by processing, the use of mulitple speakers, the relative "deadness" of the room, etc... That isn't to say that there aren't "overlaps" between these two formats or audio presentations. There are. But when you begin talking about fine tuning a system for one purpose or the other, by definition this means moving out of the areas of overlap -- out of the areas of compromise -- and into the areas that bring about the very best performance for your particular purpose.

Usually, what I tell people is that it is possible to build a system which does extremely well with one format and "passable" with the other (subjective to the listener of course), or to build a system which is not optimized for either but does a pretty darn good job of both. With either arrangement, it is best to determine what is most important to the owner of the system and to bias the setup accordingly. Sometimes the best solution is to have completely separate systems for each format negating the need for such compromises altogether.

Even though rshad0000's stated goal is to have a system that does music and HT equally well (or at least better than his current system does), I would still encourage him to identify which is MOST important to him or for which purpose the system will be used MOST of the time. If he buys in accordance with these priorities then he won't be disappointed in the end.

Q

[pixelthis]

Wrong again. You can't really determine which speaker is 'MOST' important because all speakers in a 5.1 system need to be calibrated in such a way that they are working together to give a full experience. It's really a bit misleading for you to say that the left and right are 'effects' speakers. The front 3 speakers (LCR) should perform together to create a front soundfield, all 3 are working together in unison together, which is like asking which leg on a tripod is the more important one?
SO all of the home theater forums and home theater magazines and books I have read are wrong.
Sure you need a "seamless" soundfield in front, but the center channel is by far the most important, because thats where the DIALOG mostly comes from.
As much as 90% of your sound from a movie comes from the center channel, thats why they're so expensive.
My current b&w center cost 318 new, the 602s2 PAIR I use for fronts cost 540 together,
but dont beleive me , just go to any audio store where they know what they're talking about
(harder and harder to find I know) or just ask the guys at widescreen review, or any other stereo rag.
Its pretty much common knowledge, this is why a "phantom " center is so inadequate:hand:

[drseid]

SO all of the home theater forums and home theater magazines and books I have read are wrong.
Sure you need a "seamless" soundfield in front, but the center channel is by far the most important, because thats where the DIALOG mostly comes from.
As much as 90% of your sound from a movie comes from the center channel, thats why they're so expensive.
My current b&w center cost 318 new, the 602s2 PAIR I use for fronts cost 540 together,
but dont beleive me , just go to any audio store where they know what they're talking about
(harder and harder to find I know) or just ask the guys at widescreen review, or any other stereo rag.
Its pretty much common knowledge, this is why a "phantom " center is so inadequate:hand:

Nothing wrong with using a phantom center if you are sitting in the sweet spot, IMO... The center channel speaker's purpose pretty much is to anchor the dialog and other sound to the screen (center) location so others in the room who are not be in the sweet spot can get decent sound too (as opposed to the speech sounding like it was coming out of the speaker they are closer to if a phantom center is used and they are not in the sweet spot).

While I have a center channel speaker, if I am watching a movie alone in my primary listening chair, I can get better sound using a phantom center, as my center channel speaker has to sit below my TV on a shelf on its side, and that is obviously not optimal. By using the phantom center mode with my mains, I get much clearer dialog and sound in general.

As for center channel speakers and price... I don't see any reason why they are "better" than any left or right main speaker if those speakers are of good quality. Quite frankly, having three identical speakers up front could sound wonderful, but it is very difficult for most people to afford or fit into their room requirements (no way could I do it with mine, to my chagrin). My center channel speaker is just the top part of my L/R mains for reference (no bass module unit -- see my avatar minus the bottom half and you get the idea), but placed on its side with a magnetically shielded version of the same exact drivers. Nothing special about it, really (and its price is the same as one of the top halves of my mains -- not too surprisingly). Personally I would not take the word of just any salesman at those stores. There are many who know plenty about good audio and the like, then there are many who just want a good upsell. :-)

---Dave

[PeruvianSkies]

SO all of the home theater forums and home theater magazines and books I have read are wrong.


Quite possible. Don't take their word for absolute truth.



Sure you need a "seamless" soundfield in front, but the center channel is by far the most important, because thats where the DIALOG mostly comes from.

That's DIALOGUE. It might be where the dialogue comes from, but let me see you sit there and watch a whole movie without left and right and only getting center channel sound and then tell me just how important everything else is.


As much as 90% of your sound from a movie comes from the center channel, thats why they're so expensive.

The center channel might have sound coming through 90% of the time, but the left and right probably do as well, do you have any statistics showing the activity level of each speaker? So left and right speakers are not expensive then, only center channels??????


My current b&w center cost 318 new, the 602s2 PAIR I use for fronts cost 540 together,
but dont beleive me , just go to any audio store where they know what they're talking abou

I don't believe you and I don't need an audio store to help me make up my mind on the issue.



(harder and harder to find I know) or just ask the guys at widescreen review, or any other stereo rag.
Its pretty much common knowledge, this is why a "phantom " center is so inadequate

Oooh yeah cause Widescreen Review wrote the law on Home Theater....please. This is also the same rag that gives 5+ for sound and 5 for picture on DVD's and act like the picture could NEVER be beat, then HD-DVD and Blu-ray come along....what are they going to give them a 5++++++ for picture and sound. That rag is a hype magazine trying to pump up sales just like the rest of them!

So much for common knowledge.

[SlumpBuster]

While I have a center channel speaker, if I am watching a movie alone in my primary listening chair, I can get better sound using a phantom center, as my center channel speaker has to sit below my TV on a shelf on its side, and that is obviously not optimal. By using the phantom center mode with my mains, I get much clearer dialog and sound in general.


Not to pile on, but... Me too. That was even more true before I had a DD receiver. Certainly with good old Dolby Pro Logic I would use the Phantom if it was just me watching.

The analysis of Center being most important held more value in the pre digital days. The idea of 90% of sound coming from the center filled all the publications and catalogs back in the 90s. But with five full range and discrete channels, the sound mixer could mix all the "center dialog" to the back right if he wanted to. Predigital everyone said DLP was the bomb, I thought it sounded like garbage. But, I'll never forget the first 5.1 mix I listened to at home (Jet Li's Hero - I know I was late to the DTS/DD table), and I was hooked. In part because that outdated "Center is most important" mentality was obsolete and even the surrounds were shaking the walls.

[Mr Peabody]

Drseid, are you using analog or digital connections from your HD disc players? If using digital on either, did you detect any difference in sound on standard DVD?

[drseid]

Drseid, are you using analog or digital connections from your HD disc players? If using digital on either, did you detect any difference in sound on standard DVD?
I am using analog on my HD DVD player, and digital on the BD player. In the case of the HD DVD, I did (and do) notice a better sound, but really only when watching HD DVDs with DD TrueHD soundtracks. If it is a regular soundtrack (regular DD or DTS) I will frequently switch back to digital for easier bass management. This applies to all standard DVDs, obviously.

I will be testing the analog outs on the BD player soon when using BD discs, now that Sony has also upgraded it to be able to play DD TrueHD... Bass management on both players is horrible through the analog outs though. I guess that is one of the downsides to 1st gen players... On standard DVDs, I think there are probably more disadvantages than advantages to using the analog outs. In my case, my Cary has a very good DD and DTS decoder anyway.

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

I just wondered what your experience has been. So far, I've only used digital out from my Blu-ray player. The sound quality was noticeably better on BR discs and I thought even better on SD but as some one pointed out the SD audio would still be compressed and I shouldn't hear a difference. So maybe I was so impressed by the BR that I just thought I did.