Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
Keep in mind that when I refer to mismatching center speakers I'm not talking about brand matching, I'm talking about timbre-matching.

I firmly believe that it is as simple as I stated. If the center speaker matching is insufficient, the liabilities far outweigh the benefits. My argument in favor of using a center speaker in the first place has more to do with how the soundtracks are mixed, and trying to reproduce that signal as closely as possible. The default downmixing on a 5.1 soundtrack does not always create a solid phantom center image, however the detrimental effect that process has is nothing compared to how a mismatched center speaker can hollow out and ruin the front soundstage. I've heard center speakers from Boston, B&W, and Bose that mismatched the mains so badly that I much preferred the sound with the center speakers switched off.

The horizontal positioning of a center speaker already ensures that the match won't be perfect, but in plenty of cases, it can be close enough so that the benefits of having that center speaker in place outweigh whatever drawbacks it brings. But, so many center speakers have been designed almost as afterthoughts -- different drivers, different tonal characteristics -- that they cross that line where their liabilities begin to outweigh the benefits. Even worse when timbral characteristics get deliberately jumbled together by consumers looking to add a center speaker to an existing setup, and go on the cheap. With surround speakers, you can get away with mismatches because of how most of the existing 5.1 soundtracks got mixed (with separation between the front and surround soundstages, and minimal mixing that crosses the front and surround channels at roughly equal levels). With center speakers, the mismatches become apparent very quickly.



I think we're in agreement here. My point is that center speakers are already compromises to begin with because of their horizontal alignment. Any further compromises in the timbre matching and the utility of the center speaker falls below the compromises inherent in going without a center speaker.



Actually, I would much rather go without a center speaker than without surrounds. IMO, the best justification for the upgrade to 5.1 is the full bandwidth discrete surround channels. It's the surround channels that create the depth perception and limitless horizontal soundstage with good multichannel music soundtracks, and it's what gives that extra sense of immersion with movies.

Growing up in L.A., I was totally spoiled by the number of movie theaters down there that featured 70mm presentations. In the days before theatrical Dolby Digital and DTS, this was the only way to hear discrete full bandwidth surround sound. That's why I was never enamored with Pro Logic, because it still featured a two-channel soundtrack with bandwidth limitations. The center speaker did not represent enough of an upgrade for me to make the upgrade.

It wasn't until 5.1 DD decoders became available for home use that I seriously even considered upgrading from two-channel. The key difference there was discrete surrounds. IMO, that is the key to recreating the theatrical experience. Even more important than the subwoofer, because even in a 5.1 theatrical setup, not all of the theaters will have good subwoofers in place.
I'm with Kexodusc on this one, with the understanding that this is all personal preference, and not simply there is only one right way to go. I have owned both a 5 channel surround system, a 2 channel system, and now am back to a 5.1 system again. Actually it is a 3.1 system. No surrounds yet. Do I miss them? For music no, for HT, only a little bit. I have never had a good place to put them, and once this is resolved, I will get rear surrounds. But I do have a center channel (that doesn't match my mains), and since I didn't have one with my 2 channel system, this was much more missed than my surrounds. Not even close.

And do I care that my center (Athena) doesn't match my mains (Paradigm)? Again, not even an issue to me. It used to be, but now I believe there are other things in life to worry about. I made sure I had all of the channels with the same output (I thank Woochifer for this), and that alone makes a bigger difference to me. Granted, Athena and Paradigm Monitors are not all that different to begin with. If I had mixed a horn with a planar speaker, I might feel differently.

Also, almost as important (to me) as the center, was adding my old sub back into my system. I didn't have it with the 2 channel system, and now that it is back, it just makes both music and HT much more enjoyable.

I have posted about sub purchases, and am still looking. I would spend a lot more on a sub purchase than a center speaker purchase. Because for me, the sub makes a big difference on music, whereas for a center is not even being used.

It is also important to note that generally when I do get to listen to a DVD at night, I can't turn it up real loud anyway, so most of the time any mismatch with timbre that might exist is so subtle at best, as to be a non factor. If I listened at reference levels, again, I might feel differently. We all have different expectations and demands. My demands are much more aligned with getting music right (and I have a long ways to go) than with HT, which is less a priority. Have a nice weekend y'all.