What do you think of soundbars compared to speakers?

For me a sound bar is perfect but I don't watch action adventure films so a 7.1 system is a waste of money. TV and movies to me are brain dead activities that don’t require a lot of money invested to be satisfied.

There is a wide enough range in soundbar quality, size, and price points that sweeping generalizations aren't particularly useful. Sure, if you get a $200 self-powered internal matrix TV add-on, it will have limited power and range, but not so for the ones above $1K designed to mate with a real subwoofer that rely on an external AV processor to feed it the surround signal.

Sure, there are plenty of little self-contained soundbar/sub/rear channel combos for $200-300 for people who don't want complexity and wires. They aren't up to the standards we're used to, but they're a major improvement over the built-in speakers on an ultra-thin flat panel display.

On the other hand, several reputable speaker companies make some excellent-sounding soundbars. A few years ago I heard a factory rep demo of the Goldenear 3D Array XL combined with its Forcefield 5 Subwoofer. That's a $2600 rig that also needs an external surround processor and amplification. It has eight 4.5" mid/bass drivers and three folded ribbon tweeters.

From the moment sound came through this system I didn't pay any attention to the form factor, because is simply sounded *right*--full-range, great tonal balance and clarity, and equally adept at music and dialogue.

There are many other soundbars coming from respected manufacturers such as Focal, PSB, Paradigm (self-powered, review here), and several others that perform far beyond what we hear in the Big Box stores.

I utilize a Paradigm soundbar with a REL subwoofer for my secondary viewing area of our home.  Our everyday area is a 7.2 B & W arrangement driven by Parasound amps and separates.  Although the two areas don't compare, I like the simplicity and quality of sound the Paradigm and REL provide.  It does the job!

I don't disagree with anything said here: I think there are more factors than 'just' sound and budget which dictates whether you go soundbar or separates. I have a dedicated listening room with a nice 2ch rig, but we put the TV elsewhere. There 'could be' room for speakers and amps and processors, but I opted for the Martin Logan Vision soundbar for a number of reasons, mostly aesthetics but also ease of use (Btw... I am THRILLED SILLY with it) for their intended use (hooking to TV to replace awful little rear firing speakers). It is seamless to use (auto on when the TV is on); optical pass through of audio signal, from TV (no switching inputs); I tend to think the 'bar is voiced with movies/TV in mind ('fit for purpose'). Now, specific to the ML model I have, it was the best sounding one that I could audition: the ribbon tweeters and woofers are just superb. The bass is excellent without a sub (I may add one later). It wasn't cheap!! But in this case, I feel as though it was worth every dime. The 'simulated surround' even works creepily good on some material. If I were to pick something with no other regard than sound, it would be a pretty complex system taking up LOTS of space. Adding in considerations I mentioned, and then listening to high end soundbars, the soundbar choice provides very little compromise in sound quality!

Base had the original sterne sound bars, the 901 series. Each cabinet had one crappy three inch driver aimed at you. Gratefully, the other eight crappy speakers per cabinet faces back toward the rear wall to mute the sound. Sound bars are cheap 901's, with no rightful place in audio.  They usually do sound better than the crap in flat screen. Before using a sound bar, go to a thrift shop and get a $40 receiver and buy some little speakers such as 35 year old B&W  DM 14's for less than the price of a listenable sound bar.