Yes you can have a 7.0 system that rocks on movies, and music especially if you own Hybrid type or completely active speakers. All Passive guys will need some serious power to overcome the disadvantages of a passive design, no matter who makes the speakers.
A subwoofer would be an improvement to nearly anyone's system though, mainly due to the fact that where a speaker sounds good for midrange performance is most likely not the same spot for the best bass, even with five to seven bass sources. And the obvious, .1 is a subwoofer channel designed to run to a sub with its own volume controls etc.. so distributing the .1 channel does cut down on some flexibility in setup.
Perfect-Ideal-competent-adequate-good enough all subjective terms, subwoofers in a properly designed system dissappear and become one with the Satellite speakers, especially in surround systems. Even if the Satellites are capable of incredible bass output, a Sub can help merely by increasing dynamic range and better room response/ integration. BUT! your system can still kick butt without a sub.
Reality Check------
This thread is a clear example of how misunderstood multichannel sound is to the average home user, and the dealers who try to put together the systems for them.
Walnder and Aroc with just crazy presumptions about movie sound and center channels and subwoofer quality. Most of my "theaters" sound better (playing music from CD in PLII) than the pathetic I mean carefully crafted "audiophile" systems I hear in people's homes. Multi-channel is something you can't slap together like a 2 channel system and call it art like we seem to do here on audiogon. It requires and understanding of how the components work, and interact and this cannot be done by "feel". Either you know it or you don't. Clearly by your "opinions" and funny statements you have not take the time to get aquainted with these design parameters. Thus you're trapped with what you know. And unwittingly have joined the "Chadnliz Theater Philosophy Club" the motto, "Loud, Proud and Wrong"
Sorry for you both, I am
|
hmmm. only one showcase home per decade huh?
(hey I'm just poking fun lol) |
Actually I have found that an HT setup with no center and a sub sounds superior to a center and no sub. I will caveat this with the fact that the fronts I am using are the Aerial 10 T's with a very nice processor, (Cal 2500).
I'll go a step further and say that the system without the center did not give up any ground to the system with the center when I am sitting in between the two fronts. If you are looking at buying a front end, spend what you would have put into the sub into your fronts, you'll be rewarded with superior imaging & soundstaging and two channel playback will benefit as well. The sub was the last piece of the equation I added, (Rel Strate III) and the family did enjoy watching movies with only the Aerials up front...the sub took the movie experience up a notch and as a bonus improved the two channel set up to even a greater degree. |
I actually agree with much of what you have said Cinematic. At the performance level of most systems, a good powered subwoofer makes a huge difference in the enjoyment of the movie experience. I was only responding to some of the over-the-top and condescending comments made by Flrnlamb in a couple of his posts prior to my joining the thread. He was so rude and full of himself without having a leg to stand on that I felt compelled to give him a few jabs.
But just so I am not misunderstood, at the very highest-end of audio and home theater (the state-of-the-art), having a mediocre powered subwoofer (like the one mentioned in Flrnlamb's example) will actually make the system sound worse than it would without it. A Definitive powered subwoofer will not even come close to sounding as good in the bass as pair of big Wilson speakers driven by a Boulder 1000 watt amplifier. My comments were in reference to that ludicrous example specifically. But yes, in the real world of much more affordable components, the same powered sub can be a wonderful thing. The same applies to my comments about a center channel sometimes making worse sound than the much better quality mains could.
Also, you shouldn't assume that a good understanding and of what some consider "wacky expensive" audiophile systems precludes an equally good understanding of multichannel home theater systems. I actually love both, and believe that many who are home theater enthusiasts could benefit from some audiophile experience.
Simply assuming that almost any powered sub, speaker and crossover combination can work and blend well is setting the bar too low. THX requirements are also setting the bar way to low. There really is a reason that not a single respected high-end loudspeaker manufacturer chooses to pay the fees to have a THX logo on their speaker systems. Having to meet the THX requirements wouldn’t just dumb down a loudspeaker, it would render it incapable of making natural and realistic sound.
While theater systems are different from two channel audio systems in a few ways, most obviously in the number of speakers, they require the same techniques and understanding of what makes each channel sound good and natural, and to get each channel to blend and image with the other channels in the system. Your equipment and loudspeakers have no idea what the difference is between a movie soundtrack and a music recording. Their job is to accurately reproduce the input signal as best they can. Because of this, the best foundation for a great theater system is a great two-channel audio system and the people who tend to achieve the best sound are those who have significant experience in high-end two-channel audio. |
Oh, here we go again!!!...
First off Waldner, I NEVER MENTIONED A DEFINITIVE SUBWOOFER!!! What I did mention, was the POWERED 500-1000WATT SUBS BUILT INTO (huge difference)a pair of properly integrated Def Tech BP2000/2000tl's (and do a fine job I might add, compared to 99% of the separate powered sub setup jobs most people end up with in their "ill-setup" and ill-conceived sub/sat systems, cause they can't setup/place the darn sub right anyway!!!). (even though that's the way to do it, and offeres the best flexibility)
I've had these Def Tech speakers in a couple of stores, and many many setup's, and they're still most of the way there, bass-wise, to some passive Wilson woofers in the WATT PUPPIES!, yes! There's simply better control pottential in the active woofers from the Def's, properly setup, yes! Still, granted, maybe a smidge more tightness and speed, better damping, whatever, from the better higher end driver Wilson's, sure. Still, get the movies and heavy dynamic stuff rolling full range, and the Def's (bass dynamics-wise)walk away from the Wilson's, which you can bottom out, distort, etc...I know, I've done em on NUMBEROUS OCCASIONS! Not so with practical applications of the PB2000's.
Now I'm basically correcting Walden (who'm I love to chastice, criticize, and basically despise for no apparant reason...lol!), who likes to take what I say, and put words in my mouth, twist things all around, show how much he DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT world class home theater, or even addequate home theater, cause he's in love with his two speakers, that are not capable, full range of doing HT properly, this I know!!!!
Case in point, even though I don't own or promote Def Tech, I still know the old active woofer designs they made are powerful enough for super strong bass dynamics, unlike most full range passive speakers for the home.
Still, as Waldner123 MIS-STATED, I never said anything about an individual Def Tech sub!, not once!!!
Yeah, and for the record, I've used and promoted 2 channel plus a sub (2.1) for many many setups, including my own! Yes, it can be done well.
I just like to chose up sides, get obnoxious, and pick on wiennies like Waldner123, for no apparant reason...mostly cause I can't do it on the job...lol
Oh, and Walden? I'm not in the slightest bit interested in sharing my resume with someone who'd never buy from anyone but the used-gear market on the net anyway! You're in your own little 2 channel closet world anyway...no one on the plannet could sell to these guy's anyway.
I could sit here, expound the most profound and meaningful b.s, about this stuff out there, convince everyone here about how to setup the absolute stone cold best, world class setup's, and it would make no difference to my bottom line!!! This is NOT a place/market for selling! It's a chat room for DIY'ers! I sell to "Joe-blow" off the street, who's not a "tinkerer". Wisely, my customer get's my experience, and world class.
Why sell Honda's to working stiff's all day, when you can sell Lexus's to the white colar crowd?! That's my moto...location is everything I've once heard...and this is "ear-candy central!"
Enjoy all the free advice you moochers!...lol |
Cinematic? I think Waldner123 likes you!!!! That's hot!... (Paris Hilton)...lol
This cracks me up actually. Waldner?...if we all come over and play some heavy metal, bass-destroying heavy percussion, bass-laden world-beat music, some rap, serious Techno music from the clubs, and some "dino-romp" heavy DD/DTS tracks through your KILLER 2 channel setup, we're all gunna be mighty impressed, right!?!!!!
I just wanna be sure, so we know what to bring...muuuuuuahahaaaaahhahahaahahaha!!!!
Yeah, that's right, It's all very funny, and I've seen/heard it a million times. So so so so so many of the 2 channel "full range" HT-setup guy's think that they got the end-all-be-all HT system, running dirrectly from their dvd player, into their $10,000,000 preamp and $2000 amp combo, and they think it's the chiznit!!!
Well, ok, but it's just not, really!!
yeah, the audiophile speakers are nice and clear, and pretty, and delicately detailed, on a low-level-dynamics scheme of things kinda way. Personally, we need those attributes from a speaker system, to be true, yes. But in terms of large scale macro dynamics, and an acutal mico-dynamic's perspective for REAL PRESSENCE AND INPACT, they are mostly SERIOUSLY LACKING!!!! Yes, it can be "ok", but that's about it. Don't expect to blow the pants off anyone with your StarWars Demo like this, any time soon. They get better at the local cinema, believe it!
The sad truth, dynamically, and I've said it a million times, is that, ESPECIALLY going the 2 channel full range passive (sans subwoofer)(especially sans the pre/pro) route, is not very powerful, like intended. Dynamically, we're talking a serious lack of dynamic transparancy, realism, impact, and emotion! Wimpy, wimpy, wimpy!!!
If you don't think so, just go down to the local Sam Ash store, and pick up some moderate, even passive designed, "pro audio" speakers, that have little problem dishing out real dynamics! MOstly we're talking a complete dynamic thrashing of what's on the home market! You get into larger versions, and active speakers, and the price of an "E-ticket" dynamic ride just got very interesting!!!!
All I'm sayin, is people just don't mostly know! They think they got it goin' on with their 2 speakers usually, but they don't! There's a lot more to this HT stuff here than meets the eye folks!
There are a scant few out there that REALLY know how to do it right. Everyone else just thinks they are. |
Ok, let's look at what's the focus and interests of the general "A-gon" crowd here are, so maybe we can help clear all this mess up here...
I'm looking at the "discussion forum" category break downs, and the posting trends that I can remember off hand, and I've put it all together. (aren't you all so glad?!...lol)
I see here we've got 11,000+ posts for "preamps/amps". Next most is "speakers"...yeah!!!!(with 8,000+ posts). Then we got "digital", with 5,000+. Then "cables" with 4000+ postings, followed by good ol' "analag" with 3000+, ending with "HT" at 2000+ posts for discussion...
Ok, so what I gather, is that, even though speakers are DEFINITELY the most important factor in any audio system, gear-wise, THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY SECOND IN IMPORTANCE to the "gear-heads" on this forum!!! Go figure. Most people here, it seems, from what I read, worship their 10 baggillion dollar CAT L1/Macintosh/Golden Tube/whatever preamp's, as THE ANSWER TO ALL TINGS GOD LIKE IN RELATION TO AUDIO!!!!! I mean I think there was, what, like over 1000 posts (litterally) regarding a past posting entitled "Preamp deal of the century", er something er other, right? So we see the priorit order here.
Then, Digital over analog! K, true audiophiles here, all of em!!! Yeah, don't be FRONTIN'!!!!!!!!!...all you digitalia peps!...lol (ok, I'm one too...oh well...lol!).
And then, we got "Home theater" with a lowly 2000+ postings, WAY BEHIND EVERYTHING ELSE mostly!!!!
So, let me get this straight...most of the people here swimming around in the Audio Gon pond, are really into their preamps, then maybe their 2 channel speaker system. They then like their digital DVD players and CD players more than their turn tables and tuners I suppose. Then, lastly, they MIGHT consider HT, or at least ponder whether HT is even worth it er not!! After all, their great sounding world class, super dupper 2 channel, exotic, one of a kind preamp's (yawn) must be making their mediocre, "just get by" speakers they picked up at the flee market sound SOOOOOOOOOOO good!!!...driven by their 5 year old dvd player or 300 disc cd changer, no less!!!
Of course, there's obviosly still some "tube-guy's" and turntable dedicated's around here...let's not forget them.
Still, they think NOTHING OF HT!! So it's no wonder people here are on the 2 speaker HT bandwagon! It all makes sense now!!!
Oh, it also apears many here believe cables "make a difference!" That's at least a good sign...lol
Like I said, "show me someone who doesn't think cables make a difference, and I'll show you someone with a crappy sounding system...every time!" |
Three Flrnlamb posts in a row and they get more rambling and incoherent each time. What in God's name is he even talking about? Let's have some fun and try something new. Can anyone guess how many exclamation points Flrlamb used in his last post? A. 16 B. 28 C. 46 D. So many that the author would have to be insane! E. Both C and D If you answered E, you are correct. Those who answered D get partial credit for make an astute observation apart from the tedious exercise of actually counting such a ridiculous number of exclamation points. Next time I'm going to count the number of times he uses "lol" or types in all caps. Also, for a guy who has bragged about his credentials to the point of making everyone nauseous, he really doesn't want to verify what those credentials are. Flrnlamb said: If you need your home theater (come on over, anytime folks, really!) done to a world class level, then you call me!...seems fair enough, sure...lol I’m certainly not interested, but maybe some other Audiogoner’s are. "Come on over, really..." Where? |
As a newcomer to the 'Gon, I would feel honored to get flamed by Flrnlamb, sort of as a rite of initiation. So here goes.
I would like to comment on the distinction between "passive" and "active" as I understand those terms in this thread. The crucial point is not whether or not the amplifier is inside the same cabinet as the big cones. Rather, the crucial point is whether the crossover occurs before or after the high-level amplification. I have a VMPS New Larger subwoofer, which is passive in the sense that it does not contain a built-in amplifier, but since I am feeding it an input signal that was crossed over prior to amplification, it yields the same advantages that Flrnlamb enumerates for powered subwoofers.
There seems to be a growing school of thought that the best overall sound quality, for both music and home theater, results from placing the crossover BEFORE the amplifier. The real question in predicting a subwoofer's addition to (or subtraction from) overall sound quality is whether the subwoofer starts with a line-level, already-divided input signal (best solution) or whether the subwoofer takes a full-range high-level input and then extracts the bass from it, sending the remainder to the other speakers (inferior solution).
This idea is nothing new. Audiophiles have been bi-amping and tri-amping their speakers for decades. (Although, if full-range signal is delivered to each set of binding posts, then the benefit of this appoach seems uncertain.)
I found an interesting discussion of this topic in Sigfried Linkwitz's website www.linkwitzlabs.com. Linkwitz, no slouch in crossover and loudspeaker design, designed his Orion speaker with a separate pair of binding posts for each driver, thereby requiring 3 or 4 channels of amplification per speaker. The crossover, which is custom made for the specific drivers employed, occurs at line level, between the preamp and the power amp. The result, he claims, is accuracy and dynamic range that is unobtainable with high-level crossovers (the kind that most of us have).
There are many large full-range speaker systems with flat response down to 20 Hz or lower. According to the viewpoint I am describing, these full-range speakers may have an inherent disadvantage if they divide the signal after it has been amplified. The combination of a high-quality subwoofer, high-quality line-level crossover or surround processor, and high-quality amplifier, would seem to have an inherent advantage over the other system design. |
Javachip
Certainly sounds like a vote toward the dsp8000 then! Just that it is digital until the crossover. |
Javachip,
No flame here - I promise - just a slight correction in terms. It might actually be more accurate to say that the Meridian DSP speakers maintain a digital signal THROUGH the crossovers, as the crossover is also digital. The D to A convertors are at the end of the signal path immediately preceeding the amplifiers, after all DSP processing (such as volumne, treble, bass, balance, tilt, etc.) and crossovers. |
Javachip - sorry - my post should have been addressed to Dmurfet |
"The people who tend to achieve the best sound are those who have significant experience in high-end two-channel audio."
I wish this were the case, but often the experience rarely transfers. I think a good ear is a good ear though no matter how many channels. But two channel setup dudes never can seem to wrap their mind around 7.1 channels.
"I actually love both, and believe that many who are home theater enthusiasts could benefit from some audiophile experience."
Well an experience with well selected "audiophile" equipment would be more to the point. I once made a horror movie called the "Audiophile Experience". Kind of like Psycho without the shower scene, but there was an incident with record cleaning fluid. ;)
"Audiophiles" are too diverse a creature to define as two channels inability to be satisfying when the signal is represented most accurately leaves the masses to seek religion more than truth because the truth is a bit thin and shallow and downright uninvolving. So now it is audio patch work time with fuzzy tubes, 12" full range speakers and other weird solutions, Dipole, omnipole....anything one can do make it music sound more realistic except real surround sound.
Fear of the Rear channel: Circumauraphobia
Later |
I agree with Flrnlamb,
Johnmcelfresh, you need to do some more research. |
Wow. What a thread. My only comment is that when you watch the sound engineers mix the sound tracks- its done channel by channel for the most part. ( Lots of playback and reworking and balancing to be sure). But the information, from an audio standpoint, is crafted for, in most cases but not all, a 5.1 channel balance.
I do think you can have a decent movie audio expereince with high end 2 channel, but the digital 5.1 sound tracks are made to be heard through 5.1 channels. Anyone who is missing out on a quality center channel has missed the boat. trying to do 5.1 through 2 channel means you can never hear how the soundtrack was designed to be heard.
Just like trying to take a good 2 channel recording and play it through a 5 channel stereo option leaves a less than desired result, trying to hear a 5.1 designed soundtrack through a 2 channel set up, while gratifying through high end speakers, falls short of hearing the movie audio experience as it was designed to be heard.
My only other comment is that I really don't personally enjoy the bass reproduction on the Def Tech line of speakers. That's just my opnion. |
Bass reproduction is, first and foremost, a function of proper seating and speaker placement. This is at least the equal, likely more important than the actual speaker design, in regards to bass woofer. That's what I find!
I've heard the best speakers and woofers in the world placed where there's absolutely NO bass response to be heard! Basically, the speakers were placed in a huge null!
On the other hand, you can easily place woofers and listening possitions where the sound is so boomy and unatural, that any fidelity potential is a wash!
give me a properly setup speaker system, over all the "potential" in the world, every time! That's just me.
I do think you have much greater flexibility however from a sub/sat system vs. full range speakers in the typical smaller or medium sized domestic home spaces usually involved.
I've personally heard the Def Tech's setup, simply superbly in the past. But I can easily see setting em up "wrong" for ill-results though. |
try a james sub or a sunfire signature for home theatre... they pack a punch and work really well and have a small foot print...
i have a sunfire signature in my ht systtem and though it doesnt intergrate with music as well as my rel sub did...it is pretty good for home theatre (ie incredible imo) considering its size...i couldnt find anything else close (the james is very good) |
I only have been into theater for 10 years and to me home theater is to recreate the effects of being in the movie. I have heard big, expensive, full range speakers and they sound awesome. I think they sound good for theater but are still missing the impact. I sit at my office everyday and when a big rig goes by I can feel the vibration and my seat seems to become heavier from me getting pushed down from the impact. Now this is the best bass you can get because it is real and natural. Mind you not music but sound effect from real life. When my sub started doing the exact same thing I thought "wow". Subs can be very accurate and add the impact (realism) that real life dishes out. That is what home theater is about. You need a great sub for that. If you are just playing concerts than maybe not. |
For me, home theater is all about eating Twinkies! I love yellow Twinkies...they take my mind off of all the short-comings out of my system, and transport me to a place where puffy white clouds, and noodle salad reign supreme...
Clipper ships...I love Clipper ships...sailing...shifting...adrift in a sea of torment and termoil...
Gee my subwoofer sounds all nice and "squishy!". Fat big subwoofers, pounding....throbbing...shifting too and fro...on the go...ya know?....
...gee me thinks me subwoofer's sounding slow.... |
