mono blocks for home theater?

I use three mono blocs for two front channels plus dialogue. This in my dedicated stereo, plus home theater system. I use two stereo amps for the rear run in bi wire plus bi amp.

Yes, it is overkill but it makes a huge improvement in sound. In my opinion, surround needs all the help it can get .

Worth it to you? Only you can make that decision.

I just finished putting together a secondary theater in the family room of my new house and I got a little carried away. I had 5 Antique Sound Labs Wave mono amps on hand and was curious what a low powered tube home theater system would be like. I have another dedicated theater upstairs and a seperate 2 channel system in my den so I didn't want to spend a lot of money because the family room system is mainly for my two daughters (ages 2 and 5). After trying a few different things I ended up using 3 ASL Wave amps for the 3 front channels and 4 channels from a Pioneer reciever for the rear and side surrounds. I needed to have the rear speakers in the ceiling and 8 watts just wasn't enough for any in-wall speaker I am aware of. The Pioneer reciever was a great find because it has preamp outputs for all channels and it looks cool in the silver finish with my Wave amps and silver Pioneer SACD/DVD-A player. The front speakers are a pair of Axiom M22tis and a VP150 center speaker with a HSU VTF-2 for the low-end. All told I only spent about $2000 for all of the audio related components (including paying an electrician to run 4 speaker lines for the surround speakers). It sounds different than my higher powered solid state system upstairs (using a single 5 channel amp) but I have been using it way more than I expected. I never listen to music on the upstairs theater but the new system downstairs has been on constantly. This probably has more to do with the tubes and the multi-channel SACD playback than the fact that I am using mono amps (neither of which are in my upstairs theater).

Now that I have written this, I am not sure how much of my experience will be useful to you since you will most likely not be using low powered tube amps but I love my new tube home theater system. Funny how it is now "my" system but I still let the girls watch their Willy Wonka and Power Puff Girls DVDs - just had to make sure that the tubes were out of reach of little, curious hands.

I personally think, unless were talking about some massive powered mono's for a lowish sensitivity speaker systems, and you are running the speakers as "large" on the pre/pro, I say are really not where most should concentrate their intentions. I think the deminishing returns kicks in REAL FAST, and you don't get that much back. Could it improve? Sure, depending greatly on the associated speakers and application.
Since I'm a huge personal advocate of setting the vast majority of home audio passive speakers to "small", and letting powered subs handle the demanding bass, I double that statement!
I think most people would be served just fine, with superb potential results using either strong high/quality multi channels or 2/3 channel amp combos, etc. I think they do the jub superbly set up correctly. If you're thinking that you'regetting WORLDS OF IMPROVEMENT OVER THE SONIC SPECTRUM going mono's, think again. ESPECAILLY WITH MOVIE MIXES, the area's of potential improvement, for the most part, in most applications, are going to be small to negligable.
MAYBE do mono's, if you must, for your main 2 channels for music, and do a multi for the rest. I just don't see most people needing (it's all good though...whatever floats your boat) to go that extreme for such little payback. You'll get all they dyamic ability that's capable from most speaker systems by doing proper bass managment, possibly bi-amping large speakers when necessary improvments dictate there, and/or just use quality sounding higher end amp's through out. I think mono's make little difference in and of themselves one way or another.
I just don't think people should be goign out of their way to fiddle with "mono's" as the solution to "sonic excellence" from their HT system. Probably we're potentially, all things equal, talking small percentages of differnce, if any in most situations. But,I'm sure many would sware otherwise.
I think upgrading elseware would better serve. Concentrate on set up/acoustics, pre/pro selection, video/audio sources, cabling, power conditioning, tweaking/calibration, overall system matching, BASS MANAGEMENT, sub/seating/speaker placement(huge), etc. Get the best amp(s) you think makes LOGICAL sense, and makes the speakers do what they'r capable (within reason for HT, considering they should laregely be running only uperbass/mid/high's, etc).
I think I would be looking to "bi-amp" most full-range speakers that I was considering full range before powering with monoblocks. But that's me....just don't see the need mostly. The mono's would have to sound WAYYYYYYYY BETTER before I went there. But knock yourself out otherwise. I've heard all the big Krell mono dedicated HT's, driving massive Class A rated JM Utopias, Wilson SLAMMS, Dunlavy's, etc. And for the most part, I just don't find the improvements THAT PRESSING..even for the most ambitious set up's. There are other ways to skin the monkey if need be.
Good luck

Get Parasound JC-1 monos if you can afford them.