Hello,

I've been shopping for a new set of speakers and a receiver, an
upgrade from (virtually) nothing. This is primarily for music. The
dining and living rooms are all in one 28' x 11' space (no wall)
although I intend to set them up as part of the 16' x 11' piece. The
receiver is most likely going to end up being Denon AVR-1603. I can't
decide on the speakers. I auditioned Energy Take5+1, Klipsch Quintet
and Definitive ProCinema 60 by playing a bass-heavy and then an
ambient electronic track. Energy offers the best value while
Definitive had the best sound (to my ears). Klipsch didn't deal with
bass very well but it was auditioned in a very noisy environment so I
might give it another listen. On the other hand the ambient on Klipsch
sounded terrific -- all the minor details were very crisp.

I am going to listen to Paradigm Atoms and PSBs next.

Here are some numbers:

Energy Take5+1 (3 pieces+ S8 sub): $500
Custom Energy package: S8.2 sub, XL-C100 center, Take2.2 fronts: $656
incl. tax
Definitive ProCinema 60 (3 pieces+sub): $600

Based on price alone I am leaning towards Paradigm Atoms for fronts
and CC-170 center around with a powered sub, assuming the Atoms will
perform as advertised. I am also considering a non-Paradigm sub,
either HSU VTF-2 ($500), SVS 25-31PCi ($500 no tax) or Energy S8.2
($270 incl tax) or S10.2 ($470 incl tax). If I go with a lower-priced
option, it would be

Energy S8.2 sub: $270 incl tax
Paradigm Atoms (1 pair) + CC-170 center : approx $400 retail.
Total: $670.

If I buy Paradigms from a dealer, I can probably negotiate 10-20%
discount on Atoms to drop it to around $600-630. As you all can see
the prices for 4 packages are very much in the same ballpark.

Which package would you get?

Thanks,

PNG

Persona Non Grata wrote:

Hello,

I've been shopping for a new set of speakers and a receiver, an
upgrade from (virtually) nothing. This is primarily for music. The
dining and living rooms are all in one 28' x 11' space (no wall)
although I intend to set them up as part of the 16' x 11' piece. The
receiver is most likely going to end up being Denon AVR-1603. I can't
decide on the speakers. I auditioned Energy Take5+1, Klipsch Quintet
and Definitive ProCinema 60 by playing a bass-heavy and then an
ambient electronic track. Energy offers the best value while
Definitive had the best sound (to my ears). Klipsch didn't deal with
bass very well but it was auditioned in a very noisy environment so I
might give it another listen. On the other hand the ambient on Klipsch
sounded terrific -- all the minor details were very crisp.

I am going to listen to Paradigm Atoms and PSBs next.

Here are some numbers:

Energy Take5+1 (3 pieces+ S8 sub): $500
Custom Energy package: S8.2 sub, XL-C100 center, Take2.2 fronts: $656
incl. tax
Definitive ProCinema 60 (3 pieces+sub): $600

Based on price alone I am leaning towards Paradigm Atoms for fronts
and CC-170 center around with a powered sub, assuming the Atoms will
perform as advertised. I am also considering a non-Paradigm sub,
either HSU VTF-2 ($500), SVS 25-31PCi ($500 no tax) or Energy S8.2
($270 incl tax) or S10.2 ($470 incl tax). If I go with a lower-priced
option, it would be

Energy S8.2 sub: $270 incl tax
Paradigm Atoms (1 pair) + CC-170 center : approx $400 retail.
Total: $670.

If I buy Paradigms from a dealer, I can probably negotiate 10-20%
discount on Atoms to drop it to around $600-630. As you all can see
the prices for 4 packages are very much in the same ballpark.

Which package would you get?

Thanks,

PNG

I have an idea but I cannot answer, it would be a "casus belli". ;-)

Persona Non Grata wrote:

If I buy Paradigms from a dealer, I can probably negotiate 10-20%
discount on Atoms to drop it to around $600-630. As you all can see
the prices for 4 packages are very much in the same ballpark.

Which package would you get?

Neither. I'd skip the sub and get two small towers. Higher WAF
and smaller footprint as well - just two speakers to drive for music.

LAter on, you can get into home theater, by adding small surrounds.
The reason I like full-range fronts is because most of the time
I listen to TV or Radio or Music - all stereo - and a subwoofer is
not really required. I don't like phantom surround myself, and only
DVDs and a very few primetime TV shows actually are in surround sound.

The other 90%+ of the time, it is so much easier to just play
good music out of the two main speakers. Oh - it also saves you money
as you can add some small surrounds as your budget permits.

As for good speakers, there are several. Energy and Klipsch make
okay speakers, IMO, but Tannoy makes their MXm line that are quite
good for the money. Yeah, they are made in China, like everything
else in this price range, but whatcha going to do?

I'd recommend a pair of MXm4s myself. Tannoy and KEF make excellent
bodget speakers, IMO - that are a step above the Energy and small
microsystems. Nothing special, mind you, but no real defects, either.
Good sound on a budget. If you can locate a pair of Mercury (non
X series), their larget speakers are also good. The M4 and M5 were
quite nice and affordable. The MX are the same as the MXm, just not
shielded. The shielded ones replaced them.

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.p...ull&1070730404
Typical retail pricing. Audiogon is a great place, though, to
find used speakers. Used recent vintage speakers can nearly
double your sound for the dollar, btw.

www.dynamichometheater.com also has a few other brands listed, like AAD.
AAD is a small firm, but makes excellent speakers. Phil Jones, the
owner, did work at Acoustic Energy, Boston Acoustics, Platinum Audio,
and Soliloquy. He's a competant designer and his designs are very pleasing
to the ear. They list the AAD C series smaller towers from $449-$749.
The 200i speakers would make excellent surrounds later on.

I like this store quite a bit, as there is no tax, and shipping is
free. What you see is what you pay(the Audiogon listings are only
$30 shipping) The local dealer wants 10% off retail, plus tax,
so their deals are quite nice. Either Tannoy or AAD would work well, IMO.

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om
Hello,

I've been shopping for a new set of speakers and a receiver, an
upgrade from (virtually) nothing. This is primarily for music. The
dining and living rooms are all in one 28' x 11' space (no wall)
although I intend to set them up as part of the 16' x 11' piece. The
receiver is most likely going to end up being Denon AVR-1603. I can't
decide on the speakers.

I'm prone to agree with the general thrust of Oberlander's comments. If
you're a relative newbie who is interested in the best bang for the buck,
one of the last things I think you need to do is to put money into 6
speakers. You would probably be better served by just 2 better-quality
speakers.

As much as I advocate subwoofers, in the price range you're in, you just
might do better with a couple of good full-range speakers. But don't shut
out the possibility of a 3-piece solution. Fact is, just about all
so-called "full range" speakers in this range would typically be
significantly enhanced by adding a REAL subwoofer. However, that should be
further down the road.

$300-600 a pair is a highly competitive range for speakers. Brands to look
at are Boston Acoustics, Definitive Technology, Infinity, JBL, NHT, Paradigm
and PSB (in alphabetic order but not an exclusive list).

Arny Krueger wrote:


$300-600 a pair is a highly competitive range for speakers. Brands to look
at are Boston Acoustics, Definitive Technology, Infinity, JBL, NHT, Paradigm
and PSB (in alphabetic order but not an exclusive list).

One minor note - JBL Pro and the crummy consumer line are two different
parts of the company. Two others to add to the listen-if-you-can list
are Mirage(line up from Energy, same basic designs) and Athena.

Athena might be a possible option as even though they are more expensive,
their subs integrate into their speakers to make full-range towers later
on. Thier lower-end lines which are nearly identical sounding to the

They just added Best Buy to their distribution network, though, which is
good, because Best Buy often has all sorts of coupons and such at their
website. Best Buy doesn't carry the better SCT series, though.
www.audioadvisor.com and www.onecall.com are the other two sources
according to their website. $600 for the ASF2s is pretty good, imo.

www.athenaspeakers.com

Arny: Comments on Mirage, Athena, AAD, and Tannoy? Who makes the best
budget line? I'd personally think AAD myself, but I haven't heard
their newer speakers. I have heard their high-end ones, and they are
excellent, though.

On 13 Oct 2003 01:12:56 -0700, Persona Non Grata wrote:

Paradigm Atoms (1 pair) + CC-170 center : approx $400 retail.
Total: $670.

If I buy Paradigms from a dealer, I can probably negotiate 10-20%
discount on Atoms to drop it to around $600-630.

If you can get them cheap in Canada, if it's not too far a drive.

--
www.cloakanddagger.ca

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
ink.net
Arny Krueger wrote:


$300-600 a pair is a highly competitive range for speakers. Brands
to look at are Boston Acoustics, Definitive Technology, Infinity,
JBL, NHT, Paradigm and PSB (in alphabetic order but not an exclusive
list).

One minor note - JBL Pro and the crummy consumer line are two
different parts of the company. Two others to add to the
listen-if-you-can list are Mirage(line up from Energy, same basic
designs) and Athena.

Athena might be a possible option as even though they are more
expensive, their subs integrate into their speakers to make
full-range towers later on. Thier lower-end lines which are nearly
identical sounding to the

They just added Best Buy to their distribution network, though, which
is good, because Best Buy often has all sorts of coupons and such at
their website. Best Buy doesn't carry the better SCT series, though.
www.audioadvisor.com and www.onecall.com are the other two sources
according to their website. $600 for the ASF2s is pretty good, imo.

www.athenaspeakers.com

Arny: Comments on Mirage, Athena, AAD, and Tannoy?

No experience with any of them. Don't even know where to go to listen
without doing some research.

Who makes the best budget line?

Who knows? That's why I posted a list with a caveat.

I'd personally think AAD myself, but I haven't heard
their newer speakers. I have heard their high-end ones, and they are
excellent, though.

Last low end speakers I bought were three pair of Infinity 2000-series
*monitors*. The people who listen to them seem to like them. and they were a
great improvement over the Minimus with one or more burned out tweeters that
they replaced!

Joseph Oberlander wrote:


Arny Krueger wrote:


$300-600 a pair is a highly competitive range for speakers. Brands to look
at are Boston Acoustics, Definitive Technology, Infinity, JBL, NHT,
Paradigm
and PSB (in alphabetic order but not an exclusive list).

One minor note - JBL Pro and the crummy consumer line are two different
parts of the company. Two others to add to the listen-if-you-can list
are Mirage(line up from Energy, same basic designs) and Athena.

Athena might be a possible option as even though they are more expensive,
their subs integrate into their speakers to make full-range towers later
on. Thier lower-end lines which are nearly identical sounding to the

They just added Best Buy to their distribution network, though, which is
good, because Best Buy often has all sorts of coupons and such at their
website. Best Buy doesn't carry the better SCT series, though.
www.audioadvisor.com and www.onecall.com are the other two sources
according to their website. $600 for the ASF2s is pretty good, imo.

www.athenaspeakers.com

Arny: Comments on Mirage, Athena, AAD, and Tannoy? Who makes the best
budget line? I'd personally think AAD myself, but I haven't heard
their newer speakers. I have heard their high-end ones, and they are
excellent, though.









The direct-from-factory small Magneplanars (MMG models) also fall in the under
$ 600 range. My personal opinion is that people should at least hear what a
planar speaker sounds like before committing to dynamic speakers. The
presentation is quite a bit different than that found with most cabinet-based
speakers. While I realize that these might be hard to find for an audition,
prospective purchasers might be able to find a used pair of Magnepans at a
local dealer to at least get an idea of what they sound like. I also wuld no
exclude Vandersteen 1C's from the list. Although their list price is a little
over your budget, deals might well be found - and as many have found over the
years, you get a lot for your money with these time-coherent, open-baffle (or
perhaps, more accurately, no-baffle) type speakers that try to minimize cabinet
resonance effects.



Bruce J. Richman

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om...
Hello,



Based on price alone I am leaning towards Paradigm Atoms for fronts
and CC-170 center around with a powered sub, assuming the Atoms will
perform as advertised. I am also considering a non-Paradigm sub,
either HSU VTF-2 ($500), SVS 25-31PCi ($500 no tax) or Energy S8.2
($270 incl tax) or S10.2 ($470 incl tax). If I go with a lower-priced
option, it would be


You will be very happy with the Paradigm Atoms.

Dollar for dollar, SVS is probably a better sub than Paradigm until you get
to the Paradigm Servo 15. So in your price range go with SVS for sure.

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt. Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

PNG

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om...
Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt. Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

Probably not, as any sub worth anything is going to be at least $600 alone.

Amen. Aside from sound effects, you are better off getting decent
speakers which can approach really full range while maintaining low
distortion and good dispersion than being seduced by the tish-boom of
the typical cheap satellite-sub packages.

Kal

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 21:45:56 -0400, Bill wrote:

Persona Non Grata wrote:

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

Not for that price. A decent sub alone is about $500, and to that you
have to add the cost of a good set of bookshelf speakers, and possibly a
set of stands as well. You should consider increasing your budget if the
sub/sat is your final choice.

However, you can get a decent pair of tower speakers that will sound
pretty good for $600.

The need for a sub is over-hyped these days. Everyone thinks they need a
sub so they can rattle the dishes and shake the neighbours walls, when
in fact that means the system is poorly tuned for proper levels of bass
output. The first thing any salesman does is crank up the volume level
of the sub to impress you with its power and authority. But that does
not make it sound good or accurate.

A good sub is one that does not make its presence easily known, and one
that has good output that is also accurate and not boomy or produce a
one note thump (40-50Hz hump).

On 13 Oct 2003 16:47:21 -0700, (Persona Non Grata)
wrote:

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt. Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

I had the same type of dilemma that you are in. I liked bass so i was
sure that i *needed* a sub. I ended up getting a pair of Paradigm
Monitor 7s. For the first week i thought something was wrong. I
thought there was no bass. I couldn't make dishes rattle in the
cupboards just from the bass line. I was dissapointed as i listened to
my music.

So after a few months i end up borrowing a sub to try it out. I hook
everything up and put in my cd while i crank the volume on the sub.
Way too boomy. I start turning it down. Eventually i get it to where
it sounds just right. And to my suprise it was nearly the same as how
i had the Monitor 7s set up without the sub. They do have decent
bass, you just can't force it to overpower everything else. Car audio
systems and any system with a big boomy sub now sounds wrong to me
whereas they were my idea of ideal systems back when all i owned was
computer speakers.

I still like to turn up a sub for home teater. Not for the musical
part of it but for the effects and rumblings. But for music i'm a
convert away from the big subwoofer.

Kevin

(Persona Non Grata) wrote in message . com...
Hello,

I've been shopping for a new set of speakers and a receiver, an
upgrade from (virtually) nothing. This is primarily for music.

Given that your main interest is music, then unless you have
surround-sound software (such as DVD-A and SACD discs) and a DVD-A or
SACD player, you might not want or need to get a Dolby receiver and
surround-sound speakers.

What do you plan to listen to that would require surround-sound
hardware?

There's nothing wrong with using surround-sound hardware to listen to
stereo CDs and other stereo sources, and Dolby Pro Logic can enhance
stereo playback. However, if you don't really have any surround-sound
software and hardware that you plan to listen to a lot, you might want
to get:

* Dolby receiver (such as the Denon) and use it in stereo mode. I'd
recommend a Dolby receiver, not a stereo receiver, because Dolby
receivers are priced low and will allow you a future upgrade path.

* Pair of stereo speakers.

Again, assuming you're mostly going to be listening to stereo sources,
there's nothing wrong with going with a surround-sound system. And you
may find you like the synthesized surround-sound effect Dolby Pro
Logic can provide for stereo sources. But if your sources are mostly
stereo, you could just go with a pair of stereo speakers.

Assuming most of your sources are stereo, try listening to them
through Dolby Pro Logic with surround-sound speakers at your dealer.

The
dining and living rooms are all in one 28' x 11' space (no wall)
although I intend to set them up as part of the 16' x 11' piece. The
receiver is most likely going to end up being Denon AVR-1603. I can't
decide on the speakers. I auditioned Energy Take5+1, Klipsch Quintet
and Definitive ProCinema 60 by playing a bass-heavy and then an
ambient electronic track. Energy offers the best value while
Definitive had the best sound (to my ears).

I suggest you buy the speakers that sound best to you, especially
given that the best-sounding speakers to your ear only cost $100 more.

Klipsch didn't deal with
bass very well but it was auditioned in a very noisy environment so I
might give it another listen. On the other hand the ambient on Klipsch
sounded terrific -- all the minor details were very crisp.

I am going to listen to Paradigm Atoms and PSBs next.

Here are some numbers:

Energy Take5+1 (3 pieces+ S8 sub): $500
Custom Energy package: S8.2 sub, XL-C100 center, Take2.2 fronts: $656
incl. tax
Definitive ProCinema 60 (3 pieces+sub): $600

Based on price alone I am leaning towards Paradigm Atoms for fronts
and CC-170 center around with a powered sub, assuming the Atoms will
perform as advertised. I am also considering a non-Paradigm sub,
either HSU VTF-2 ($500), SVS 25-31PCi ($500 no tax) or Energy S8.2
($270 incl tax) or S10.2 ($470 incl tax). If I go with a lower-priced
option, it would be

Energy S8.2 sub: $270 incl tax
Paradigm Atoms (1 pair) + CC-170 center : approx $400 retail.
Total: $670.

If I buy Paradigms from a dealer, I can probably negotiate 10-20%
discount on Atoms to drop it to around $600-630. As you all can see
the prices for 4 packages are very much in the same ballpark.

Which package would you get?

I haven't heard them all, and have never been able to hear them in the
same room at the same time, so I can't say. What matters is what
sounds best to you. All the brands you mention produce decent
speakers.

I'd also consider a pair of larger stereo speakers as an option, or
you could just go with a front pair of speakers and a subwoofer from
the speakers you mention above. Then if you wanted to add rear
speakers, you could do that later.

I might consider a pair of PSB Alphas ($250 or so a pair) and a
matching PSB subwoofer. These are bookshelf speakers and (in general)
bookshelf speakers are capable of sounding better than the mini
speakers you mention above. Mini speakers, because they produce so
little bass, can sound pretty thin and be harder to get sounding
decent with a sub.

But what matters most is what sounds best to you.

Thanks,

PNG

Persona Non Grata wrote:

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt. Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

No. The problem is fourfold:

- Coherency. A full-range speaker will give you a pretty seamless
and tonally the same sound across its entire range. This usually
requires a $400 and up subwoofer to accomplish if you go for the
seperates route.

- Cost. Simply put, more boxes and crossvoers and such all eat into
the quality of the sound. You can always add a subwoofer later on. Upgrading
your main speakers, though, at BEST consists of relegating the bookshelf fronts
to surrounds. Most of the time, though, it means taking a huge loss and selling
them to upgrade. Towers mean you can upgrade later on by adding less expensive
and smaller speakers(like MXm1s for the rears - they would be crummy for mains,
but as surrounds, they are inexpensive and work well).

Oh - some towers are small - under three feet tall and about 10*10 inches. The
Tannoy MXm3s will sit next to a TV stand quite easily and not be above the top
of a typical 27-32 inch monitor. My 20 incher near my computer($50 used -
cheaper than a TV tuner card on a stand is 42 inches tall. The MXm3s are
37-38 inches - small and can be placed as close as an inch from the TV.

- Range of music in videos. Almost all surround sound in movie theatres
is 40hz low-end. This is due to structural concerns and amplifier requirements.
They compensate with really LOUD sound instead. Good full-range towers will
give you plenty of bass response in movies. They won't rattle the windows,
but that's all distortion if you turn a sub up that loud.

- Use of surround/sub. DVDs are about the only thing that use surround sound,
though a few tv channels broadcast a phantom surround sound(comparable to maybe
Dolby Digital, not anywhere near DTS quality)

This means that the need for a subwoofer OR surrounds is just not there outside
of movies. In fact, if you listen to a CD or the radio, the subwoofer in most
systems will not turn on(unless you tweak with it manually). The full-range
speakers give you good response during the 80% of the time you aren't watching
DVDs.

Tannoy MXm3 - typical tiny towers: 850 x 185 x 246mm (33.5 x 7.3 x 9.7 inches)
Tannoy MXm4 - typical small towers: 940 x 185 x 246mm (37 x 7.3 x 9.7 inches)

You could almost stand these next to a 32 inch TV on the stand - they would
stick out over the top of the TV about 5-6 inches. Put a center channel
on top of the monitor and they end up being 3-4 inches lower than the
new "top" of the TV. Standing on the floor, they blend in very well due
to their 7.3*9.7 inch profile.

Bill wrote:

Joseph Oberlander wrote:


- Use of surround/sub. DVDs are about the only thing that use surround sound,
though a few tv channels broadcast a phantom surround sound(comparable to maybe
Dolby Digital, not anywhere near DTS quality)


Just a couple of notes here...

Perhaps you meant to say, "comparable to maybe Dolby Pro-Logic", since
Dolby Digital and DTS are very similar in sound quality, and they both
have at least 5 discrete channels.

Don't forget that even though Pro-Logic does not have discrete channels
in the rear, it does produce mono surround sound with a defined rear
sound encoded in the stereo signal.

If you watch a TV show with lots of Pro-Logic surround sound, like the
Simpsons, you WILL notice the effects. Sure it's not as good as DD/DTS,
but it is basic surround sound.

The frequencty response and the fact that it is phantom surround is
what makes TV shows really quite optional as far as "surround sound" goes.

Joseph Oberlander wrote in message ink.net...
Persona Non Grata wrote:

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology.

(snip)

Oh - some towers are small

Good point. Some towers now have narrow faces, because the woofers are
mounted on the sides of the cabinets. Also, some of those speakers are
now "power towers," which means they have built-in powered subs. A
good compromise for many home users, who don't want too much gear all
over the place.

(snip)

- Range of music in videos. Almost all surround sound in movie theatres
is 40hz low-end. This is due to structural concerns and amplifier requirements.
They compensate with really LOUD sound instead. Good full-range towers will
give you plenty of bass response in movies. They won't rattle the windows,
but that's all distortion if you turn a sub up that loud.

Another good point. BTW, I've used a powered sub to add some low-end
firmness to some a pair of bookshelf speakers with 5" or 8" woofers,
and I was surprised
by how little the sub was really needed. (I don't care about things
like rattling my windows with hyped-up movies special audio effects
anyway.)

- Use of surround/sub. DVDs are about the only thing that use surround sound,
though a few tv channels broadcast a phantom surround sound(comparable to maybe
Dolby Digital, not anywhere near DTS quality)

Agree. Dolby Pro Logic can do some nice things with simulated surround
effects from stereo sources, but having surround-sound gear for stereo
sources (such as FM, VHS, CDs, TV, etc.) is hardly mandatory.

This means that the need for a subwoofer OR surrounds is just not there outside
of movies. In fact, if you listen to a CD or the radio, the subwoofer in most
systems will not turn on(unless you tweak with it manually). The full-range
speakers give you good response during the 80% of the time you aren't watching
DVDs.

My sub has an auto shutoff feature, and it first it really was
surprising that due to the lack of bass content from many playback
sources, the sub often did turn off, especially when my receiver was
set at low volume. But as you point out, often there really isn't a
lot of bass content and most of the audio isn't where a sub is needed.

I'll add that for reasons like the above, I recommend bookshelf
speakers with a minimum woofer size of 5". Anything smaller will sound
thin and skimpy, IME. It's best to have speakers that can produce at
least some bass.

The idea of the mini speakers and a powered sub (which in such systems
is really a bass module) is great, but I find that with music, those
systems just don't sound too good. The mini speakers are just too
small to produce decent sound.

Neil ) wrote in alt.home-theater.misc:
Agree. Dolby Pro Logic can do some nice things with simulated surround
effects from stereo sources, but having surround-sound gear for stereo
sources (such as FM, VHS, CDs, TV, etc.) is hardly mandatory.

Although not as common anymore because SRS Circle Surround licensing is
cheaper (i.e., SRS basically gives it away), there were a *lot* of TV
shows in the 90s that were Dolby Surround encoded.

It's not mandatory to have the surround gear to listen to it, but then
it's not mandatory to have surround gear to listen to Dolby Surround
encoded VHS or DVD.

--
Jeff Rife |
301-916-8131 | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/BabyBlues/OnTheRemote.gif

Bill ) wrote in alt.home-theater.misc:
In regards to frequency response, it's true that it is limited in
bandwidth, but only for the surround speakers, and only with the
original Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro-Logic (3-ch/4-ch respectively).

Most newer Dolby ProLogic decoders either offer an option to disable the
low-pass filtering for the surround or just don't enable it at all.

The newer Pro-Logic II technology is full-range sound in the rear and
discrete left/right surround channels, more like DD/DTS.

"Discrete" is the wrong word here.

DPL-II is just a "fancier" version of Dolby ProLogic decoding (which, in
turn, is a fancier version of Dolby Surround decoding). All use the same
two-channel Dolby Surround matrix-encoded signal as their source. There
is no special Dolby ProLogic or PL-II encoding.

So, although the LS and RS can end up with different signals after DPL-II
decoding, they aren't discrete channels...they are just created by using
a more sophisticated de-matrixing system.

--
Jeff Rife | "Women...can't live with 'em...can't explain to
301-916-8131 | the desk clerk why you only need one bed."
|
| -- Ellen

Bill ) wrote in alt.home-theater.misc:
I'll agree that while the source does not use discrete channels, the end
result essentially is discrete sounds in five channels

Except that it isn't. There is bleed-over/crosstalk between channels with
the exception of a few "test" signals.

Either way you look at it, it's still much better than its predecessors.

True.

It's just that using "discrete" when it isn't is one of my current buttons,
because the SRS people claim their "Circle Surround 5.1" offers 6 discrete
channels, even though the company itself will tell you that most signals
end up in more than one speaker even if the intent is for them to be in
just one.

--
Jeff Rife | "Isn't that just great? I can't find a real
301-916-8131 | relationship...I'm incapable of meaningless
| sex...what does that leave me? Oh, my
| God...I'm gonna have to learn computers."
| -- Jon Cryer, "Partners"

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:32:10 -0400, Jeff Rife wrote:

It's just that using "discrete" when it isn't is one of my current buttons,
because the SRS people claim their "Circle Surround 5.1" offers 6 discrete
channels, even though the company itself will tell you that most signals
end up in more than one speaker even if the intent is for them to be in
just one.

Ain't semantics great? They can claim 6 discrete channels without
discussing that the signals in them are not.

Kal

Bill wrote:


In regards to frequency response, it's true that it is limited in
bandwidth, but only for the surround speakers, and only with the
original Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro-Logic (3-ch/4-ch respectively).
The newer Pro-Logic II technology is full-range sound in the rear and
discrete left/right surround channels, more like DD/DTS.

Hence, the need for surround sound in TV is truly optional.

Kalman Rubinson wrote:
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:32:10 -0400, Jeff Rife wrote:


It's just that using "discrete" when it isn't is one of my current buttons,
because the SRS people claim their "Circle Surround 5.1" offers 6 discrete
channels, even though the company itself will tell you that most signals
end up in more than one speaker even if the intent is for them to be in
just one.


Ain't semantics great? They can claim 6 discrete channels without
discussing that the signals in them are not.


Hey, here's a question for you, Kal: I believe ESPN claims to broadcast
sporting events in "Circle Surround". I always thought it was a decode
only process--is there an encoding component to their format too?

trotsky ) wrote in alt.home-theater.misc:
Hey, here's a question for you, Kal: I believe ESPN claims to broadcast
sporting events in "Circle Surround". I always thought it was a decode
only process--is there an encoding component to their format too?

Yes, there is. I do not know what it does special, though, to try and
get things steered to the right place while still sounding OK on a 2-channel
system.

--
Jeff Rife |
301-916-8131 | (insert funny signature here)

Bill ) wrote in alt.home-theater.misc:
I really don't like SRS or any kind of "expanded" sound...it just isn't
natural at all. Have you ever flipped by a surround sound show like
Voyager or Enterprise that has a constant hum of the engines and listen
to it with one of the expanded modes? Ugh.

Although I know how to use my equipment, I honestly can't say how I would
enable one of these modes. This is how little I care about those fake
sorts of things. I *think* my TV has the option, but I never use its
speakers. For my A/V receiver, I have macros on the remote for ProLogic,
straight 2-channel stereo with low bass fed to the subwoofer, and "don't
alter it all all" mode (which sends 2-channel only to the front speakers,
and anything multichannel and discrete like DD or DTS to the appropriate
speakers). I never use any other modes.

--
Jeff Rife |
301-916-8131 | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverThe...Internet02.gif

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om...
Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt.
Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

Is there a Costco where you live? You might consider a KLH system:
Subwoofer, $80; 2 satellites, $40. My brother just bought this
system, and it compared favorably with several others I've heard at 4
times the price. The satellites even look nice with natural wood
sides. And Costco has the best return policy on the earth; you can
return anything at any time.

Norm Strong

normanstrong wrote:

snip

Was that you in Stereophile recently?

Nexus 6

Nexus 6 said:

normanstrong wrote:

Was that you in Stereophile recently?

Don't tell me they ran an article on Loudmouth Audio Cheapskates.

George M. Middius wrote:


Nexus 6 said:


normanstrong wrote:



Was that you in Stereophile recently?


Don't tell me they ran an article on Loudmouth Audio Cheapskates.

No, but if I'm right, they gave him some space in the
letters section.

Nexus 6

Nexus 6 said:

Don't tell me they ran an article on Loudmouth Audio Cheapskates.

No, but if I'm right, they gave him some space in the
letters section.

Oh, a letter. JA (and presumably his predecessors) should be given
credit for allowing the anti-audio wingnuts to blather about "tests"
and blinding rituals in the Letters section. That's the pre-Usenet
version of "audio debate". Or maybe the upscale version -- the letter
writers are mostly ideologues but with somewhat discernible thought
patterns. In contrast to creatures like Krooger, Ferstler, and
Nousiane, who express themselves like 11-year-olds plucked at random
from a remedial English class.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:58:32 GMT, normanstrong wrote:

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om...
Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt.
Certainly
I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?

If you must have a sub and don't want to (or can't) spend a lot of $$$,
check out Radio Shack. I got a powered sub for $150. Is it as good as
a $1000 Klipsch or whatever? No. But I'm happy with it... it makes the
flor rumble for me :-)

--
************************************************** **********************
* John Oliver http://www.john-oliver.net/ *
* "For the wages of spam is death!" http://www.spamcon.org/legalfund/ *
************************************************** **********************


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

normanstrong wrote:

"Persona Non Grata" wrote in message
om...

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the feedback. The rationale for 2 full-range fronts is
solid yet I cannot live without the subwoofer, even if this is pure
psychology. A lot of music that I listen to is all about the low end
and without that it would be like eating food with no salt.

Certainly

I am exaggerating: I lived with a cheapish stereo setup that will be
blown away by anything decent I buy so not having a sub is likely to
make little difference but..

Is there not a powered sub + 2 fronts (bookshelves or sats or
lower-end floor-standing units) combo that will do better than 2
full-range fronts given a total budget of $600 or so?


Is there a Costco where you live? You might consider a KLH system:
Subwoofer, $80; 2 satellites, $40. My brother just bought this
system, and it compared favorably with several others I've heard at 4
times the price.

Heh. Try this test:
acapella vocal work - anything you like. Multipart is better, of
course.

If you can't hear all of the voices individually as well as together,
it's a substandard speaker. Smearing the sound together like a clock
radio isn't "good sound".