Speaker Matching in a 5.1 Setup

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I have Polk rti8 in the front now, csi a6 center, and rti35 surrounds. Three generations of speakers, but all matched with the silk tweeters and 6.5" drivers. There is nothing wrong with them at all. I don't know how they compare with anything else and that is of course very subjective. I have looked at so many speakers my head was spinning. I wish I had the chance to audition some that I saw but it just isn't feasible with where I live. I would love to do a blind test and see just how much better more expensive equipment and speakers sound and rule out the fact that it has to be better because it cost more. I tried to shop that way, where cost was a prohibitive factor but not a determining factor as much as positive reviews and reputation. Of course I believe you get what you pay for (to an extent) and the higher up you get the smaller the increases in quality become, so I took the biggest and what I determined to be the most cost effective step I could and now I await the results.

I have to admit that the aesthetics of the speakers did factor in. Maybe I am shallow in that aspect but I have seen some beautiful speakers. They may not sound good but they looked good. Of course most of those were in the $5000+ range and out of my budget. I wish I had more money to spend...
 
I have Polk rti8 in the front now, csi a6 center, and rti35 surrounds. Three generations of speakers, but all matched with the silk tweeters and 6.5" drivers. There is nothing wrong with them at all. I don't know how they compare with anything else and that is of course very subjective. I have looked at so many speakers my head was spinning. I wish I had the chance to audition some that I saw but it just isn't feasible with where I live. I would love to do a blind test and see just how much better more expensive equipment and speakers sound and rule out the fact that it has to be better because it cost more. I tried to shop that way, where cost was a prohibitive factor but not a determining factor as much as positive reviews and reputation. Of course I believe you get what you pay for (to an extent) and the higher up you get the smaller the increases in quality become, so I took the biggest and what I determined to be the most cost effective step I could and now I await the results.

I have to admit that the aesthetics of the speakers did factor in. Maybe I am shallow in that aspect but I have seen some beautiful speakers. They may not sound good but they looked good. Of course most of those were in the $5000+ range and out of my budget. I wish I had more money to spend...

And that is what it all boils down to-having enough cash to invest. I feel the rti 8 is just fine for what I could afford-(I got 4 with the cs-3 for $500.00, sold the extra rti's for $200.00 and traded my son my old rt-35's with center for the tsi 100's. And they are great back there! That Tommy BD was the test.
 
oh no way! well at least in my case, Duncan's "Silver"
speakers are in another league compared to my "Bronze" which are genuinely budget speakers! the BX5's are only £500 a pair and the multiple award-winning BX2's just £250 a pair. e.g. my old Beolabs were £1600 10 years ago (admittedly they have built in amps) but the Monitor Audio's wipe the floor with the B&O's in every way for a mere fraction of the cost, they really are exceptional speaker bargains.

I just enjoy picking on you! Burn a hole in your hand is British-here we say a hole in your pocket. ( or head!) in my case
 
Well I have just designed a new layout for my living room so I can utilize the new speakers I bought. I am not stuffing them into a corner and redoing everything here. Working on a deal for a new tv, stand, etc. Going to buy at least the matching center tomorow. I will have to see about the surrounds and what kind of deal I can get. I am going to use my old speakers in my new set up and see if they sound better. I think my new layout wil help a lot with accoustics. Another step to improve my sound...and it is free, just need to crawl under the house to rerun the wires.
 
OOH THOSE RS8's are FOOKIN' GORGEOUSSSSSSS...!!!!!!!! :banana: what finish are they in?

They're in Cherry Veneer. When I bought them (a few years ago) I had a good listen to a lot of makes (I had Acoustic Research AR8s as the Fronts, and Yamaha for the rest). The B&W were great but I couldn't spend the amount they'd have been, so I chose the Monitor Audios at half the price. I like the sound to be clear, the RS8s got round the slightly more bright sound of the RS6s. Since I got the new Pioneer Amp last year, the Bass has improved (more oomph) as its better able to drive them than the old Yamaha. The RXs are the latest, I haven't heard them, but if you like Monitor Audio speakers they'll be fine. Speakers are definitely a personal choice, a well designed amp should add no tonal change, but loading effects can change the way they sound if its not up to the job.
 
You can have both. Unfortunately, it's always a question of cash!
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2014-01-05 at 7.55.10 PM.jpg
    Screen shot 2014-01-05 at 7.55.10 PM.jpg
    19.8 KB
I've sold A/V gear in both the Quad and modern surround ages. Here's my take:

1- Having identical speakers for the fronts and rears is imperative. Large fronts and small rears can be acceptable for movies. There is often very little rear signal in the rears on movie soundtracks. Often, it is only sound effects. 5.1/Quad usually has very active rear channels. Surround music sounds best with matched fronts and rears.

2- The center channel speaker is a difficult call. It is imperative that it be timbre matched to the front L & R. Identical L, R & center is most ideal. On my main system, I would love a matching Mission 775 tower. Because it would be near impossible to accommodate a tower below my 60" plasma, I had to settle for the matching center. Yes, this is a compromise. Placing the center vertically on either side of the screen, shifts the audio image, which can be maddening. Placing a vertical or tower speaker on its' side will also shift the image, albeit not as severely as placing it to the left or right of the screen.

3- The subwoofer should compliment the mains. There are three kinds of subs:

A- Bose - Sub is designed to do lower midrange and upper bass. This woofer is incompatible with most other speakers.
B- Sub/sat systems. These subs are generally a mismatch with any full-range or tower speaker. They are meant to augment small speakers, which have little or no bass.
C- Subwoofers as originally intended are meant to augment full range speakers. They aren't meant to create all the bass. Instead, they shore up the bass by augmenting the low end of the speakers' range. They also add subsonics, which you can't hear but can feel. Hence, the term SUBwoofer.

My recommendations for getting the most bang for your A/V buck:

1- Speakers offer the biggest performance increase and the most bang for your $$. More money here will yield the biggest leap in performance.

2- If you listen to a lot of vinyl, extra $$ spent on a phono cartridge will also yield a quantum leap in performance. The tonearm needs to be compatible with the cartridge. For 35 years, I've been listening to vinyl with a Moving Coil, which usually requires a transformer or pre-pre amplifier. Since most cutting heads, which etch out the grooves on master disc, are Moving Coil devices, MC cartridges most closely mirror them, and IMHO, are best at reproducing the subtle nuances.

IF you're looking for new speakers:

1- Audition them, preferably in a sound room (remember those?)

2- Although you're buying speakers for surround, audition the speakers in 2ch stereo. Retailers rarely have two pairs of any speaker set up in the same room. Auditioning in stereo also gives a clearer idea of how well the speakers image.

3- Bring CD's or vinyl you're familiar with.

4- On speakers you're seriously considering, make sure they're "toe'd in." Speakers operate like binoculars. The image becomes real when they are angled properly. Angling them slightly toward the center reveals how well they image.

4- Audition speakers with classical music, even if you listen to classical a small percentage of the time. It is acoustic music, rather than a sweetened electric/electronic studio creation. Soundstage, tonality, and imaging, or lack thereof, are revealed most clearly on classical music. If speakers sound good on classical, they will sound good on everything else, too. "Rock speakers" may sound great on rock, but could be a major disappointment for other types of music.

5- You can only compare speakers by A/B'ing them at the same time, with the same source material, through the same gear, in the same room. One's recollection of how speakers really sound lasts less than 90 seconds.

6- Bring them home and audition the speakers in your room. This is time consuming, and a pain to lug the speakers around. It is the best way to test the speakers. Most reputable A/V dealers regularly provide their clients with this option.

7- Remember the "wife factor." The footprint, size, shape and color are often more important to your better half. I had regularly designed custom A/V systems with sub/sat or in-wall speakers. The woman often comments, "you're not cluttering my room with all that gear!" To avoid sleeping on the patio, a workable compromise is often advised. "If Mama is not happy, NOBODY'S HAPPY!" Fortunately, this hasn't been a problem in my home.:smokin You can even place the electronics behind a wooden door, in another room, or even in a closet. Since most electronics use IR (infrared remote), RF (radio frequency) remotes, sensors and repeaters can be added. The electronics then become invisible.
 
Here is my little KEF set.
I would never change the winning team :)

View attachment 12478

My main focus is on multichannel music rather then films. I have the same centre speaker as you (got it for a bargain price when it was outgoing). As main spakers I have 22 year's old KEF Reference floor speakers - these match the center perfectly. Add a subwoofer and two quality dipol/bipol surround speakers of other brands and you have my set up. I never experienced any shortcomings in the sound due to different brands, horizontal center or not having 5 identical speakers. Also, I am in the camp that does not want any kind of room correction like Audyssey, just make the sound inferiour to my ears - in fact my surround amplifier is a high quality Primare with no such features as room correction, radio or internet Connection - just optimized for best possible audio. Actually I use room correction for the subwoofer - a tiny DSPeaker box connected between the amp and the subwoofer that makes miracles in taking away the booming base you do not want in Music (I personally don't like it in films either, I like all my base deep and distinct...)
 
I agree
Except I have the same speaker
also front centre
I don't have to worry about screen I am also using
Moving coil Denon 303 great for CD4 and anything
 
My main system (living room) is powered by a B&K THX Ultra preamp and two B&K power amps (250W x 5), driving four Mission 775's, matching center, and a REL T-9 (400W) sub with active and passive 10" drivers:
3354-mission_775.jpg
av-world-rel-t9-subwoofer.jpg
View attachment 12489
View attachment 12490

My second system (bedroom) has four Polk T-20e's, powered by a Denon AVR-3801 (110W x 7) receiver and a Mission (300w) sub:
4459-t20e.jpg
100004201_1_.jpg
View attachment 12491

My third system (rec room) is an Onkyo TX-SR504(75W x 5), driving 2 Philips 477's and 2 Electro-Voice EV-4 speakers (Mismatch!). Each are full-range with 12" woofers.
13438498605300835.jpg
ElectroVoice_E-V_Four_Speakers_Web.jpg

My fourth system is a Calibre 240 receiver and Marantz 2440 (rear channel amp with full-logic SQ), powering four Kenwood speakers. It resides in my LP/CD collection room.

My fifth system is a Sony HCD-HDX285 Home Theater in a Box with sub/sat speakers, which I inherited when my Dad passed. It plays 5.1 SACD, and resides in the room with my 5.1/Quad/Blu-Ray/DVD collection.
31puw3NVgrL.jpg
 
My main system is powered by a B&K THX Ultra preamp and two B&K power amps (250W x 5), driving four Mission 775's, matching center, and a REL T-9 (400W) sub with active and passive 10" drivers:
View attachment 12494
View attachment 12493
View attachment 12489
View attachment 12490

My second system has four Polk T-20's, powered by a Denon AVR-3801 (110W x 7) receiver:
View attachment 12492
View attachment 12491

My third system is an Onkyo OnkyoTX-SR504(75W x 5), driving 2 Philips and 2 Electro-Voice speakers (Mismatch!). Each are full-range with 12" woofers.

My fourth system is a Calibre 240 receiver and Marantz 2440 (rear channel amp with full-logic SQ), powering four Kenwood speakers. It resides in my LP/CD collection room.

My fifth system is a Sony HCD-HDX285 Home Theater in a box with sub/sat speakers, which I inherited when my Dad passed. It plays 5.1 SACD, and resides in the room with my 5.1/Quad/Blu-Ray/DVD collection.

Wow. 5 systems!
Then you can play every discrete channel on one system! :)
 
In my quest for better and better sound, had been experimenting for quite a while switching out speakers, amplifiers, preamps, speaker wires, interconnects, turntables, decoders, demodulators, phone cartridges, etc. All these components play important roles in the overall sound quality (some may argue about wires and interconnects). But I can recall two distinct changes in my system that made the greatest impact in the overall listening experience for the better:

1. Replacing my Bose four channel pre-amplifier. I didn't want to believe the naysayers. After all, isn't Bose supposed to be the best? As it turns out, no, it isn't. The difference was night and day

2. Using five identical speakers. After doing so, surround music suddenly sounded so much more cohesive. I'm pretty sure one can put together a set of similar, though non-identical, speakers which give a nice soundfield for a great many surround titles. However, I prefer to take speaker matching out of the equation. Given all the variables in a good sounding surround system, that is one less thing I have to worry about. I have since upgraded to better matched speakers and will likely do so within the near future. But I can never go back to unmatched.
 
In my quest for better and better sound, had been experimenting for quite a while switching out speakers, amplifiers, preamps, speaker wires, interconnects, turntables, decoders, demodulators, phone cartridges, etc. All these components play important roles in the overall sound quality (some may argue about wires and interconnects). But I can recall two distinct changes in my system that made the greatest impact in the overall listening experience for the better:

1. Replacing my Bose four channel pre-amplifier. I didn't want to believe the naysayers. After all, isn't Bose supposed to be the best? As it turns out, no, it isn't. The difference was night and day

2. Using five identical speakers. After doing so, surround music suddenly sounded so much more cohesive. I'm pretty sure one can put together a set of similar, though non-identical, speakers which give a nice soundfield for a great many surround titles. However, I prefer to take speaker matching out of the equation. Given all the variables in a good sounding surround system, that is one less thing I have to worry about. I have since upgraded to better matched speakers and will likely do so within the near future. But I can never go back to unmatched.

Bose supposed to be the best ask mamita Linda about bose.
 
On speakers you're seriously considering, make sure they're "toe'd in." Speakers operate like binoculars. The image becomes real when they are angled properly. Angling them slightly toward the center reveals how well they image

I was going to bring up toeing in.. bit of a bone of contention personally.. I've had speakers that benefitted from it enormously (generally bigger cabinets like my old Mordaunt Short MS25's) and others where the sound fell apart doing so (the KEF Coda's needed to be square on and near the wall or they just sounded dull and lifeless).

interesting that the ITU layout suggests toeing in Front L&R in a 5.1 configuration because I've found with my last couple of setups the front soundstage narrows too much doing so and especially with my current Monitor Audio's treble edges up a touch too when they're on axis, so I leave them facing straight out into the room rather than toe-in.
 
I was going to bring up toeing in.. bit of a bone of contention personally.. I've had speakers that benefitted from it enormously (generally bigger cabinets like my old Mordaunt Short MS25's) and others where the sound fell apart doing so (the KEF Coda's needed to be square on and near the wall or they just sounded dull and lifeless).

interesting that the ITU layout suggests toeing in Front L&R in a 5.1 configuration because I've found with my last couple of setups the front soundstage narrows too much doing so and especially with my current Monitor Audio's treble edges up a touch too when they're on axis, so I leave them facing straight out into the room rather than toe-in.

Thats what they do in audiophile show rooms.
The main speakers are never on axis, but straight.
So the stereo effect gets wider.
I have mine in between axis and straight. :)
 
Back
Top