It is an interesting theory, but a very bad way to allocate your budget. Lets say you have $20K to spend on those four speakers. Your options are spending $5K on four identical speakers. Alternatively you can spend say $9K a piece for mains and $1K a piece for surrounds (or $8K/$2K - whatever) . If like most of us you spend most of your time listening to either stereo, movie soundtracks with most information on the center channel and the occasional discrete MCH misc source with lots of information on the surrounds, you are far better off spending a lot more on mains.
Purpose of using same speakers for surround?
So, I'm wondering why I've heard it is best to have 4 identical speakers for fronts and surrounds? Since the rear (or surround) speakers are only giving out a limited amount of information to fill in details, I see no real reason that any reasonably competent speaker that reproduces down to 80hz wouldn't be just as effective?
In my case, I have been using matched Mirages across the front, with a pair of Pardigms for the rear. I keep thinking about wanting to get another set of Mirages for the rear, but unless there would be some marked improvement, I don't see the point?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
In my case, I have been using matched Mirages across the front, with a pair of Pardigms for the rear. I keep thinking about wanting to get another set of Mirages for the rear, but unless there would be some marked improvement, I don't see the point?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.