Home theater 7.2.4 setup suggestions please

[PKSian]

Hi,

Thanks to this forum and few YouTube channels, I am finally taking the leap to set up a dedicated home theater.
Requesting assistance in finalizing the equipment. Thanks in advance
HT system : 7.2.4
Room: 11'x18' room with 9' ceiling, no Windows
Screen: 133' 16x9
Speakers: 3 identical towers behind the screen. Have 18" space between the screen and the back wall. Prefer in wall and in ceiling for the surrounds and Atmos.
Seating : Single row on a 6" riser
Viewing Distance : 12'
Use: 75% Movies, 25% Music
Room image: Attached

I have decided on these
Screen: Seymour AV Centerstage XD AT screen
Projector : Sony VPL-XW5000ES
Subwoofer#1 : Monoprice 13" THX 2000 Watt
Subwoofer#2 : Monolith M-10 V2 10in THX 500 Watt

Audio Equipments
Option 1: Martin Logan Speakers
AVR: Onkyo RZ50/Integra 4.3/ Denon 3800h
Front speakers : 3x New Martin Logan Motion F10
Surrounds : 4x ML MW6 (in-Wall)
Atmos : 4x IC6 (In-Ceiling)

Option 2: Klipsch Speakers
AVR: Onkyo RZ50/Integra 4.3/ Denon 3800h
Front speakers : 3x Klipsch Heritage Heresy IV
Surrounds : 4x THX-502-L (in-Wall)
Atmos : 4x CS-18C (In-Ceiling)

Option 3: Arendal Speakers
AVR: Onkyo RZ50/Integra 4.3/ Denon 3800h
Front speakers : 3x 1723 Monitors
Surrounds : 4x Ci4100QL-THX (in-Wall)
Atmos : 4x KEF Ci160ER (In-Ceiling)

I am not very technical on frequency response of the speakers or which type of tweeter (dome or horn or ribbon) is better. I am just looking for a speaker system that can deliver natural sounding vocals and good listening for 3 hrs long movies. Which of these options suit well ?

Does the front and surround speakers I have chosen go well for the overall surround sound system, especially Option #3 with Arendal and KEF speakers ?

Which AVR should I choose - Onkyo RZ50/Integra 4.3/ Denon 3800h ?

Thank you

 

[Ellebob]

It is better when all speakers match as you get more seamless sound as as sound is panned between them. I work as a calibrator and I never find mismatched speakers give as good.

One note on in ceiling speakers you want to use angled in ceilings if you are placing them at ~45 degrees in front/behind listeners. I have been to installs with the Kef CI-200RR speakers and they are nowhere near optimal at 45 degrees. Speakers should aim at the listeners.

People often talk about something having a good off axis response but many don't understand what that means. A good off axis response means that the off axis response is similar in shape to the on axis but will have decreased mids and highs from ~500hz and up. A poor off axis response will start having big dips at certain parts of the frequency range no longer matching the on axis response. At 45 degrees off axis most speakers are down close to 10db or roughly half volume in mids and highs.

Definitely noticeable. So get in ceilings that aim can aim at the listeners and I wouldn't use any of the ones you listed unless you plan to put them directly overhead which isn't recommended. I know Martin Logan makes that same speaker in an angled version the IC6-HT. Arendal and Klipsch don't make any angled in ceiling speakers but many other brands do.

You want something that angles at least 30 degrees. Avoid ones that only angle 15 degrees or have pivoting tweeters.

 

[Holmz]

It is better when all speakers match as you get more seamless sound as as sound is panned between them. I work as a calibrator and I never find mismatched speakers give as good.
…

^agree^

And if they are playing at the same time while panning, then it makes more a difference than if they are bouncing from to the other with no overlap in sound.

 

[PKSian]

It is better when all speakers match as you get more seamless sound as as sound is panned between them. I work as a calibrator and I never find mismatched speakers give as good.

One note on in ceiling speakers you want to use angled in ceilings if you are placing them at ~45 degrees in front/behind listeners. I have been to installs with the Kef CI-200RR speakers and they are nowhere near optimal at 45 degrees. Speakers should aim at the listeners.

People often talk about something having a good off axis response but many don't understand what that means. A good off axis response means that the off axis response is similar in shape to the on axis but will have decreased mids and highs from ~500hz and up. A poor off axis response will start having big dips at certain parts of the frequency range no longer matching the on axis response. At 45 degrees off axis most speakers are down close to 10db or roughly half volume in mids and highs.

Definitely noticeable. So get in ceilings that aim can aim at the listeners and I wouldn't use any of the ones you listed unless you plan to put them directly overhead which isn't recommended. I know Martin Logan makes that same speaker in an angled version the IC6-HT. Arendal and Klipsch don't make any angled in ceiling speakers but many other brands do.

You want something that angles at least 30 degrees. Avoid ones that only angle 15 degrees or have pivoting tweeters.

Thanks for the response. Couple of questions

Speaker choice : do you mean all bed layer Speakers to be same brand ? On my option # I chose ML motion series. Do you think it will be a seamless sound ?
On option #2 there was Klipsch thx-504-L that I was considering for fronts but since I have a space to add tower speakers I am considering heresy IV. I don't know how this will match with the rear 502s. Same with option 3 Arendals. Any experience with Klipsch heresy or Arendal for home theater ?

Ceiling speakers: I am starting to learn about angled in ceiling speakers and thanks for your inputs. The challenge in my room is, if you see the image. The ceiling is already angled on the sides and ceiling speakers will go on those angled speakers.
With that ceiling type. Which angled ceiling speakers do you suggest ?

 

[Ellebob]

If they are going on the angled part of the ceiling and only using one pair of speakers for Atmos that would be fine as you could put them to the sides of the listeners. However, you will definitely have to work some angles if using angled part of the ceiling for 4 Atmos speakers. You still need to put Atmo speakers in front and behind the listeners. Putting them on the angled part will not have them angled back/forward respectively towards the listeners. Break out your protractor out and measure angles and see what speakers are angled to aim at listeners for placing where you would like. Although a little narrow it might be easier to go on the center part of the ceiling.

You can get decent sound by mismatching speakers but everything is always more seamless when sounds move between the various speakers if they are all very similar. Ideal is identical speakers everywhere and that is simply not practical in most homes. Try to keep it as close as possible to create what I call being in that bubble of sound. You can correct for it a little with EQ and in that case it is almost better to tell the receiver/processor to match the front speakers instead of going for whatever curve it equalizes to. Some proessors have that option to match the fronts.

 

[PKSian]

If they are going on the angled part of the ceiling and only using one pair of speakers for Atmos that would be fine as you could put them to the sides of the listeners. However, you will definitely have to work some angles if using angled part of the ceiling for 4 Atmos speakers. You still need to put Atmo speakers in front and behind the listeners. Putting them on the angled part will not have them angled back/forward respectively towards the listeners. Break out your protractor out and measure angles and see what speakers are angled to aim at listeners for placing where you would like. Although a little narrow it might be easier to go on the center part of the ceiling.

You can get decent sound by mismatching speakers but everything is always more seamless when sounds move between the various speakers if they are all very similar. Ideal is identical speakers everywhere and that is simply not practical in most homes. Try to keep it as close as possible to create what I call being in that bubble of sound. You can correct for it a little with EQ and in that case it is almost better to tell the receiver/processor to match the front speakers instead of going for whatever curve it equalizes to. Some proessors have that option to match the fronts.

Thanks for the input. I will have 4 speakers on the angled ceiling with listening position in the center. I thought angled Ceiling will help for Atmos placement, guess need some work on identifing correct speakers and place/angle then perfectly to the listener.

 

[Ellebob]

It would help if the speakers were to the sides of the listening area like if only doing 2 overhead speakers but not 4 speakers with two in front and two behind the listeners. If you dowload this guide and look at the diagram with the person sitting in the chair labeled Overhead Speaker PLacement Detail for 7.1.4. Speakers 7 + 8 should be angled towards the listener and not facing straight down. Same thing in the diagram where it says perspective detail for 7.1, those should show the speakers angled and aiming the cones of sound towards couch. Unfortunately, the drawings are not correct and more about placeing the speakers ~45 degrees in front and behind the listeners. This simplification messes up a lot of people.

https://www.dolby.com/siteassets/about/support/guide/setup-guides/7.1.4-overhead-speaker-placement/7_1_4_overhead_speaker_setup.pdf

 

[PKSian]

It would help if the speakers were to the sides of the listening area like if only doing 2 overhead speakers but not 4 speakers with two in front and two behind the listeners. If you dowload this guide and look at the diagram with the person sitting in the chair labeled Overhead Speaker PLacement Detail for 7.1.4. Speakers 7 + 8 should be angled towards the listener and not facing straight down. Same thing in the diagram where it says perspective detail for 7.1, those should show the speakers angled and aiming the cones of sound towards couch. Unfortunately, the drawings are not correct and more about placeing the speakers ~45 degrees in front and behind the listeners. This simplification messes up a lot of people.

https://www.dolby.com/siteassets/about/support/guide/setup-guides/7.1.4-overhead-speaker-placement/7_1_4_overhead_speaker_setup.pdf

I see you point. I will surely consider when selecting and placing the over head speakers.

 

[Battlebeast]

Why the 2 different subs? It just usually causes issues. Better off with 2 12s than 1 13 and 1 10.

 

[RMW_NJ]

Out of those 3 systems I’d probably go with Arendal, mainly because I like their design philosophy. Though as others have said I’d try to place the same brand speakers all through the room.

 

[Ellebob]

Why the 2 different subs? It just usually causes issues. Better off with 2 12s than 1 13 and 1 10.

I agree two identical subs much easier

 

[PKSian]

Why the 2 different subs? It just usually causes issues. Better off with 2 12s than 1 13 and 1 10.

Size and cost were reasons to choose those 2. I am getting feedback similar to yours to go with identical subs. Might have to choose 2 12 monothil subs or SVS PB3000 Or SVS SB3000.

 

[PKSian]

Out of those 3 systems I’d probably go with Arendal, mainly because I like their design philosophy. Though as others have said I’d try to place the same brand speakers all through the room.

Arendal speakers have great praise online. May be I should reach out to them to check options to demo their setup. I am sold on the front stage with 1723 monitors but on wall surround is what holding me back. Wish they come up with inwall this year.

 

[dlaloum]

Size and cost were reasons to choose those 2. I am getting feedback similar to yours to go with identical subs. Might have to choose 2 12 monothil subs or SVS PB3000 Or SVS SB3000.

Using your two existing subs, might well be fine if using something like DLBC...

With simpler / more basic methods of sub tuning, it might get easier with a matched pair

So if you were opting for something like the Integra 8.4 AVR - and optioning it with DLBC multisub, then you could stick with the existing subs... (in theory... I still don't have a DLBC AVR on which to try this stuff.... it is in the plans for the next 2 years)

 

[RMW_NJ]

Arendal speakers have great praise online. May be I should reach out to them to check options to demo their setup. I am sold on the front stage with 1723 monitors but on wall surround is what holding me back. Wish they come up with inwall this year.

If size is a concern you could go with the the 1961 bookshelf for side and rear surround and I’m sure it would be fine.

 

[PKSian]

If size is a concern you could go with the the 1961 bookshelf for side and rear surround and I’m sure it would be fine.

I should measure the 1961 and see how it fits and convince myself to go with on wall. I have always thought about no speakers seen in HT. So need some time to get over it. Will see. Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[amicusterrae]

Arendal speakers have great praise online. May be I should reach out to them to check options to demo their setup. I am sold on the front stage with 1723 monitors but on wall surround is what holding me back. Wish they come up with inwall this year.

For sure, EAC's spin of the 1723 looks very promising!
I would not worry about mixing and matching brands and/or series with your sides and rears. A well engineered speaker is a well engineered speaker Although not all brands offer the same objective performance, no one has a monopoly on the science. As already suggested, the ideal is flat on axis with ample and constant off axis energy to generate reflections in a consistent pattern, as exhaustively proven by controlled listening tests. An additional requirement for side and rear surrounds is even wider horizontal dispersion, though I would be less concerned about that with one seating row. Different speakers from the same brand are not going to measure the same (even multiple versions of the same model are sure to exhibit variation, unless they have been measured and tweaked after the production line, and that's very costly). Even with a hypothetical multichannel system that delivered identical direct sound, the timbre of the various reflections will be different. Research shows that our brains easily handle these different timbres, and they are not a problem.

 

[PKSian]

For sure, EAC's spin of the 1723 looks very promising!
I would not worry about mixing and matching brands and/or series with your sides and rears. A well engineered speaker is a well engineered speaker Although not all brands offer the same objective performance, no one has a monopoly on the science. As already suggested, the ideal is flat on axis with ample and constant off axis energy to generate reflections in a consistent pattern, as exhaustively proven by controlled listening tests. An additional requirement for side and rear surrounds is even wider horizontal dispersion, though I would be less concerned about that with one seating row. Different speakers from the same brand are not going to measure the same (even multiple versions of the same model are sure to exhibit variation, unless they have been measured and tweaked after the production line, and that's very costly). Even with a hypothetical multichannel system that delivered identical direct sound, the timbre of the various reflections will be different. Research shows that our brains easily handle these different timbres, and they are not a problem.

Thanks for your feedback. I will try to match speakers if not will have to settle for mismatched speakers.

 

[Puoskari]

Hi, just worth noting that with that budget you can get a pretty damn decent system from Genelec. We've used genelecs for home theater purposes (9.1.4) for a long time and making adjustments to the sound profile has been a breeze with the software tools they have available. Sadly their in-wall products are quite limited and come with a hefty price tag.