home theater/speakers

[WoodSheddin]

Paradigm or B&W Speakers

stay away from anything with the word Bose written on it

Try to avoid Best Buys/Circuit City mass market chain stores

http://www.hometheaterspot.com

[Dylan King]

Check out Dennis Prager's recommendations.
http://dennisprager.com/stereo.html

[AndyCat]

If you're serious about a Home Theatre Receiver that will also do your stereo music justice, I'd advice auditioning the NAD T series of Amplifiers. They can be pretty basic (but very effective) theatre amps, but very powerful.

When I bought mine, I auditioned every make I could and the NAD's were far better in straight stereo than any other make I tried, including Sony, Denon, HK, Onkyo, Marantz and Pioneer.

It's only by listening with your own choice of music/movies with preferably the speakers you want together that you can make a choice.

[Stefan]

Although people can recommend brands of speakers to buy, the only way to get what sounds good to you is to go out and listen. Go to upscale shops and listen to what they have to offer. Bring with you your favorite cd's or dvd's and just listen and compare. There is nothing wrong with circuit city or best buy if they happen to sell the speakers that you like. But a specialty shop will have informed employes and better set-ups.

Same with receivers. Although if you are looking for the best sound, seperates are the way to go.

Also, the room and placement of your speakers play a huge part in the quality.

Go to www.hometheatertalk.com for a good forum on this topic.

Stefan

[Steve Marcus]

Realizing that all answers are relative, what is the minimum budget for a good home theater system that will do justice to music reproduction?

Or, what I've been asking my wife...

Do I buy a home theater system or an F tuba? (BTW, my current stereo system is dying a slow, painful death...)

[sloan]

Do you want a home theater? Or a system for listening to music?

There's a difference.

Home theaters put considerable resources into rear channels which are mostly useful for movie special effects. - and completely worthless for listening to music.

Start with an *excellent* (the best you can afford) pair of stereo speakers. I favor old-fashioned designs which tend to be very simple. For "theater", the next addition should be a center channel - here you want a speaker which matches the tone qualities of the left/right channels, but you also need to worry about interference from the video (if you are watching on a CRT).

Rear channels are best achieved by waiting until you upgrade your existing front channel speakers - move your existing front channel speakers to the rear. But, unless you watch a lot of movies featuring air warfare, your rear speakers will be silent 90% of the time.

I am occasionally tempted by the systems which include a single low bass box and a cloud of teeny surround speakers. The (valid) research says that you can't really localize the low frequencies, etc. etc.... but I hold to the school of thought that 1970-era stereo speakers do a *better* job of reproducing the lows than these boomers.

Ken "a big fan of the EPI line- may it rest in peace" Sloan

[Chuck(G)]

NEVER use a steel needle. Use saphhire or, even better, diamond needles....

[jlbreyer]

NEVER use a steel needle. Use saphhire or, even better, diamond needles....

Hi Chuck

I see the you are from my era. I still remember the old Victrola we had when I was a kid and how my Mother was always having to rewind and reinstall the spring!

[Mitch]

I HIGHLY recommend speakers from Vandersteen Audio (vandersteen.com). I bought mine ages ago (2 of them), for a reasonable price, and invested in a Nakamichi amp. I've been asked numerous times, "Where are your surround speakers? I don't see them..." I spent about $1500 for the setup, and it was worth every penny. Turning it up -half- way induced bleeding. The imaging is far beyond anoything else in its class, and you'll have to spend more than $5000/pr for anything that comes close. Two properly-powered Vandersteens will create a theater environment. The 2Ce's are currently $1549/pr (and a Consumer's Digest Best Buy). If you want to go all-out, check out their home theatre set up, which currently runs about $3500. Plan on spending another $2000-3000 to power it up. Threshold Amps work extremely well with the Vandersteen. You'll swear you were "in the hall."

[Bill Troiano]

If you're interested in a 2 channel amp without the theater effects, I highly recommend the NAD integrated amps, as Andy has mentioned. I bought a NAD C372 stereo integrated amp (150 watts per channel) last year to replace a Tandberg amp and it cranks out a lot of sound without getting harsh. You can go nuts over this kind of stuff. Although I don't own them , I also recommend the Paradigm and B&W speakers for a 2 channel stereo system.

[Rick Denney]

I'm looking to spend a fair amount of money to put together a home theater system.

It depends on what you mean by "fair". The prices for many of the so-called high-end loudspeakers I've seen are about as unfair as it gets.

Keep it simple.

Dr. Sloan's advice is first-rate, as usual.

I'm using mid-80's Linn Index+ loudspeakers, of the two-cubic-foot British variety. They are acoustic suspension speakers with an 8" bass driver and a soft-dome tweeter. They are equally good for music or movies, when used as front speakers for the latter. The Linns haven't been available for years, but I still prefer acoustic-suspension or very tight ported speakers (harder to find) with soft-dome tweeters. I expect similar speakers would cost around a thousand a pair or a bit more.

Whether you need a center-channel speaker depends on your speaker placement. My front speakers are about 7 feet apart and I've never had any sense that voices were not connected to mouths. Ken is absolutely right on the mark that the center speaker needs to have the same tonal characteristics as the front speakers--if they don't it's probably better to do without (I took a center speaker back when I found the sound was better without it for my setup). I have a pair of Polk Audio bookshelf speakers for the surround speakers, and they work fine. Rear speakers (which are the difference between a 5.1 and a 7.1 system) are the least important in that most DVD's don't even use them. The most important thing is to set up the surround speakers properly, which in my opinion means get an amp with a calibrated microphone and automatic setup. The set up requires proper loudness, equalization, and time delay for each channel so they will not attract attention to themselves.

My amplifier is an Onkyo, and even without a sub-woofer will cause my wife to complain from the other end of the house. The sound it produces is clean, with good supporting power (vastly better than the Sony it replaced, though the Sony was supposedly more powerful), and a calibrated microphone automatic setup. You could do much worse for $500.

If you want the vibrational effects, buy a real sub-woofer (not merely a "bass box"). It takes watts, watts, and more watts to create that much air displacement. I don't have one because my wife and pets won't tolerate it.

My whole setup cost about $2000. To me, that's a fair amount of money. Doing better would require spending more, which should be a goal no matter how much you spend. It is a more difficult goal to reach than you think, and it requires good balance between all the parts.

Movies have different requirements than music, as Ken rightly suggests. At 85 watts into each of 7 channels (four of which are being used), my theater setup will render movies ear-splitting. But it is not powerful enough to make orchestral music sound real into stereo speakers, which is what I want so I can play excerpts as if I was sitting in the orchestra (wife not home, of course).

To achieve that sort of musical reproduction, I will always prefer a very tight acoustic suspension speaker, well damped, with a BIG amplifier. My amp is a 250-watt Samson PA amplifier into a pair of 1978 Advent Loudspeakers. Those soft-dome tweeters are so smooth with none of the crispy-fried brittleness of ribbon tweeters in my ears. And amplifier quality can be guessed at using a bathroom scale (both the Samson and the Onkyo are heavy monsters).

But none of that matters compared to this: You will NEVER create a true movie-theater experience, because the room isn't movie-theater size. It will be loud, dynamic, and exciting, but fundamentally different than long-throw bass reflex theater speakers driven by a 300-watt bridged Crown amplifier in a room 100 feet long, or the like. Just as with playing the tuba in a small room, the low frequences will not be able to resonate.

Rick "old-fashioned" Denney

[ThomasDodd]

Paradigm or B&W Speakers

I agree with you on Paradigm. Great speakes at an even better price. Developed in Canada where they get government fund (os something like that) to help lower R&D costs.

stay away from anything with the word Bose written on it

Try to avoid Best Buys/Circuit City mass market chain stores

Agreed on both counts.

[ThomasDodd]

Realizing that all answers are relative, what is the minimum budget for a good home theater system that will do justice to music reproduction?

I've never had complaints with my setup. Paradigm speakes, (towers in the front, a dual driver center, 10" powered sub, and wall mounted surrounds. I can get the models if you want them) and a Pioneer reciever (5x100W, DolbyDigital and DTS).

Not a great room. It is 28x15 (vaulted ceeling) with the seating mid way down the 28' length. Surrounds are on the wall near the seating (slightly behind). Attached to the theater room is an open 14x14 room too.

Still gives great sound for music and movies. I normally only use the to front channels (towers) for music. The DSP effect use the other channels, but I prefer the stereo setup. Fill the room with sound well, is clear on the quiet parts, and good bass response.

Cost, 7 years ago when purchased, ~ $2000 for the whole thing. Adjust for inflation.

[ThomasDodd]

Do you want a home theater? Or a system for listening to music?

There's a difference.

But a good music system can be made into a great theater system.
Good point on matchuing the speaker.

left/right channels, but you also need to worry about interference from the video (if you are watching on a CRT).

Get sheilder speaker, designed as a center channel.

But, unless you watch a lot of movies featuring air warfare, your rear speakers will be silent 90% of the time.

Not true, especially in DD5.1/DTS (and better ES/EX what have you) setups. 90% of the time you woun't notice they are active, unless you watch/listen with and without. Then you'll know. They provide subtle sounds that fill in the room and the scene.

I did this to prove to my wife they matter. Play a section with all channels active and tuned. Then play it again with the level on the surrounds all the way down (or disconnect the speaker if you can get to them easily). You'll notice the difference 95% of the time.

[ThomasDodd]

The most important thing is to set up the surround speakers properly, which in my opinion means get an amp with a calibrated microphone and automatic setup. The set up requires proper loudness, equalization, and time delay for each channel so they will not attract attention to themselves.

I don't remember auto setups as an option when I got my reciever.
I curerently use Video Essentials (1st DVD release) and a SPL meter from Radio Shack. Asl greatr for setting up the display device:)

Thinki9ng about getting a copy of the new "Digital" version. They've added some nice features, like DTS and newer sound options (instead of just Dolby 5.1), and better video calibration tools.

My amplifier is an Onkyo, and even without a sub-woofer will cause my wife to complain from the other end of the house. The sound it produces is clean, with good supporting power (vastly better than the Sony it replaced, though the Sony was supposedly more powerful), and a calibrated microphone automatic setup. You could do much worse for $500.

I need to look into that amp. :)

[Rick Denney]

I need to look into that [Onkyo] amp.

I think it's about the best thing at the "hundreds" price point. I would expect a NAD to sound better, a Harmon-Kardan to look better (ahem!) and a Nakamichi to do both. I'm sure there are others, too--I don't really keep track.

One feature the Onkyo has that the Pioneer doesn't is video upconversion. Thus, I can plug in my wife's Hi8 analog video-cam into the composite video, and watch it on the monitor, which is connected via S-Video. It's amazing what a pain in the rear things can be when you can't do that.

I was greatly impressed by the automatic setup. I put the microphone in the listening position, and punched a button. It cycled pink noise through each speaker in turn, determining which speakers were present, setting the levels and EQ for each speaker, and adjusting the time delay for the surround speakers. The key to surround speakers not being obvious (which many movie theaters don't achieve) is delaying them a bit so that the sound remains synched with the front speakers even though they are closer. It's amazing what even a few milliseconds can do to make the speakers contribute instead of detract.

Most of the new DVD's have DTS (as opposed to 5.1 Surround), but even with DTS there is often not much information in the rear surround channels (6 and 7 of a 7.1 setup).

And one thing I forgot: Getting a good sound out of any system requires more energy put into speaker placement, arrangement of sound reflectors and absorbers in the room, and placement of the listening position than in choosing the stuff, if you are really trying to get that last 2% of what is possible.

Rick "happy with 95%" Denney

[ThomasDodd]

I need to look into that [Onkyo] amp.

I think it's about the best thing at the "hundreds" price point. I would expect a NAD to sound better, a Harmon-Kardan to look better (ahem!) and a Nakamichi to do both. I'm sure there are others, too--I don't really keep track.

And all three are outa my range, along with the Nautilus speakers from B&W.

One feature the Onkyo has that the Pioneer doesn't is video upconversion. Thus, I can plug in my wife's Hi8 analog video-cam into the composite video, and watch it on the monitor, which is connected via S-Video. It's amazing what a pain in the rear things can be when you can't do that.

Luckly my monitor notices when the composite is active and switches. I have another monitor that doesn't, always taking S-Video if it pluged in. Talk about anoying. VCRs don't normally have SVideo nor do digital cameras either:(

The key to surround speakers not being obvious (which many movie theaters don't achieve) is delaying them a bit so that the sound remains synched with the front speakers even though they are closer. It's amazing what even a few milliseconds can do to make the speakers contribute instead of detract.

Yeah, my Pioneer has an entry for the distances to the listener to set the delay. Of course that doesn't account for the long speaker wires I have, but it's close enough

Most of the new DVD's have DTS (as opposed to 5.1 Surround), but even with DTS there is often not much information in the rear surround channels (6 and 7 of a 7.1 setup).

I have a few 7.1 discs, but not a decoder/amp/speakers to use it. Similar to the early 5.1 discs (mostly AC3 laser discs) that didn't really use the better range and seperat surrounsd channels verry well. Many sounded like Pro Logic + LFE .

Rick "happy with 95%" Denney

Me too That last 5% is not worth the effort. The dogs and kids would render it usless most of the time any way

[Rick Denney]

Yeah, my Pioneer has an entry for the distances to the listener to set the delay. Of course that doesn't account for the long speaker wires I have, but it's close enough

Oh, I wouldn't worry about the speaker wires, heh, heh. The signal moves along pretty quickly on those, something approaching the speed of light. It's the 1100 feet/second speed of sound to get the difference in distance from the fronts to the surrounds that is at issue.

Rick "worried about millisceconds, not nanoseconds" Denney

[ThomasDodd]

Yeah, my Pioneer has an entry for the distances to the listener to set the delay. Of course that doesn't account for the long speaker wires I have, but it's close enough

Oh, I wouldn't worry about the speaker wires, heh, heh. The signal moves along pretty quickly on those, something approaching the speed of light. It's the 1100 feet/second speed of sound to get the difference in distance from the fronts to the surrounds that is at issue.

Rick "worried about millisceconds, not nanoseconds" Denney

Yeah, hence the smiley. But I work ever day worrying about nanoseconds and and 10's of picoseconds. Amazing the effect 1/2" difference in cable length can make when you look with an o-scope.

I looked last night:
Monitor 7s, CC170 center, PDR-12 sub, and a pair of Atoms for surrounds.
I called the place I got mine for current pricing, $(750+480+200+210)- 18%(for complete set) = $1345. Prices varry, but mine are still rocking 7 years later;)

*My previous price was off. I bought a DVD/LD player, reciever, and 36" monitor at the same time, so got confused with the totals.

[Steve Marcus]

Amazing the effect 1/2" difference in cable length can make when you look with an o-scope.

How about the quality of cable? Is there really a significantly discernable difference in sound between Monster Cable (or the boutique cable du jour) and standard Radio Shack issue?