Surround Sound Speakers Sizes

[Descartes]

I am curious to hear from
all those who own a surround sound system. Do you find that in your opinion is it worth it having expensive surround sound speakers especially for movies?

For example one could imagine
3 KEF Reference 2- Meta for the front channels and
6 KEF LS50 Meta for surround duties

Please share your opinion and your current setup.

I personally use all KEF LS50s

 

[Golfx]

I will be interested to see if anyone who went through the expense, purchase decisions and setup implementation will have anything to say other than supportive comments. As far as movies, for me, sound is a huge necessary ingredient with bass making the most impact followed by good surround sound/atmos gimmicks. In very few movies or shows I will hear over my shoulder a sound that is so real that i pause the show to see if it was perhaps real.

 

[Descartes]

I will be interested to see if anyone who went through the expense, purchase decisions and setup implementation will have anything to say other than supportive comments. As far as movies, for me, sound is a huge necessary ingredient with bass making the most impact followed by good surround sound/atmos gimmicks. In very few movies or shows I will hear over my shoulder a sound that is so real that i pause the show to see if it was perhaps real.

What speakers do you have?

 

[Golfx]

What speakers do you have?

Hi they are in my signature line=Perlisten

 

[Chrispy]

I listen to not just movies, but also surround music. I like the surrounds to be more capable than not, and ideally the same speaker all around or at least from the same line, and tho I haven't created a system that's the same speaker all around, I do have a few systems with the speakers at least from the same model line, some others that are less matched up. I can easily see your proposed system....

 

[Steve Dallas]

When I built a new house 5 years ago, I wired the media room for 7.2.2. My initial speaker selection was Revel F206 left and right with Revel C25 and M16 as the center and surrounds, respectively. (I started out with no height speakers.) It sounded awesome. However, after miserably failing WAF, I installed Polk 65-RT in-wall surrounds and Polk 70-RT in-ceiling top middle speakers, and no one in the family noticed much of a difference in sound quality, including me.

Perhaps if I used this system for multi-channel music I would think differently, but for movies and television I find the surround speakers to be little more than noisemakers, and inexpensive in-walls are more than adequate to make the requisite noise.

So, IMHO, the OP's proposal is absolutely sound.

 

[Sancus]

If you don't listen to multichannel music I'd say it doesn't matter that much, but you probably don't want anything severely underpowered for the bed channels at least. Otherwise some effects may lack impact.

If you do listen to mch then the bed surrounds are important, I have many tracks where certain instruments mainly play through a surround.

Either way I'd keep the heights relatively cheap.

 

[jhaider]

I am curious to hear from
all those who own a surround sound system. Do you find that in your opinion is it worth it having expensive surround sound speakers especially for movies?

For example one could imagine
3 KEF Reference 2- Meta for the front channels and
6 KEF LS50 Meta for surround duties

Please share your opinion and your current setup.

I personally use all KEF LS50s

Movies isn't my interest, rather multichannel music.

My first thought is I would want wider dispersion speakers for surround. Especially if you're closer to one than the other, sounds localize at the speakers. Before height speakers, I would take a KEF or Tannoy coax and point it at the ceiling. So I would not consider LS50 Meta a good surround channel speaker. Technics C700 if you can find them would work a good deal better, if you want a coax standmount. NHT C3 is another good bookshelf for surround.

My second thought is looking at price is a little besides the point. Instead, work from goals and constraints and then see what it would cost to meet them.

In our previous house we used "expensive" sides (Pioneer/TAD S-IW891 with MSRP of $3800/pr - but did not pay that), and rears (NHT Classic Three). The sides used the same coax as our mains at first, but still worked just fine when we changed the mains for JBL 708i L/R and SCL-3 center. The only coax with wider dispersion than the TAD design is the flat Technics. The rears worked well because they had such wide dispersion, and Classic Three's weakest link (extreme HF) isn't a factor when they're behind you.

In our current system, there is a big placement/form factor constraint - the left side speaker had to be as thin as could be. That, coupled with some of the things in Sound Reproduction about using CBT arrays as surrounds, and the 2015 JBL Synthesis Atmos demo, led me to spec JBL CBT speakers for the sides (50) and rear (100 - for aesthetic reasons). That is a considerable lower cost speaker than previously used, but again the focus was on goals and constraints rather than cost. They have worked out well. They have wide dispersion where it matters for a side or rear speaker, due to being a column of 2" wideband drivers. The relatively constrained vertical dispersion seems neither especially pro or con. They have sufficient headroom for the job. They blend just fine with the three JBL 708s up front and the 4 Pioneer/TAD S-ic891a ceiling height speakers.

 

[Dj7675]

I have had quite a few different speakers in my theater and believe the best quality speaker you can get at each location matters a great deal. IMO all speakers in a system should sound good listening to music and have the ability to play as loud as the source material requires at your listening level. Immersive sound formats don't limit the peaks or frequency to these speakers. Sometimes surrounds and atmos speakers are just used for ambiance and not used heavily. However, depending on the content you watch they can be very active and quite high in levels. The more capable the speakers the better the experience.
I am currently using 9 JBL 6332/LSR32 speakers and 7 JBL SCL-8 speakers.

 

[Karls_speaker_works]

I use these tiny Gemstone speakers for side surround (shown below) and rear surround. Room is small (14' x 12') though with vaulted ceiling. The two drivers within the GS speakers are angled apart so it helps ensure sound gets to all listeners, even though they are fairly close to the seating positions (3' - 5'.) I know people make fun of Bose speakers (including myself), but these can play extremely loud and Audyssey does a good job of correcting the frequency response. They are high-pass filtered at 250 Hz, but there is one of the low frequency modules on the rear surrounds that extends to 40Hz.

 

[risandipra]

Movies isn't my interest, rather multichannel music.

My first thought is I would want wider dispersion speakers for surround. Especially if you're closer to one than the other, sounds localize at the speakers. Before height speakers, I would take a KEF or Tannoy coax and point it at the ceiling. So I would not consider LS50 Meta a good surround channel speaker. Technics C700 if you can find them would work a good deal better, if you want a coax standmount. NHT C3 is another good bookshelf for surround.

My second thought is looking at price is a little besides the point. Instead, work from goals and constraints and then see what it would cost to meet them.

In our previous house we used "expensive" sides (Pioneer/TAD S-IW891 with MSRP of $3800/pr - but did not pay that), and rears (NHT Classic Three). The sides used the same coax as our mains at first, but still worked just fine when we changed the mains for JBL 708i L/R and SCL-3 center. The only coax with wider dispersion than the TAD design is the flat Technics. The rears worked well because they had such wide dispersion, and Classic Three's weakest link (extreme HF) isn't a factor when they're behind you.

In our current system, there is a big placement/form factor constraint - the left side speaker had to be as thin as could be. That, coupled with some of the things in Sound Reproduction about using CBT arrays as surrounds, and the 2015 JBL Synthesis Atmos demo, led me to spec JBL CBT speakers for the sides (50) and rear (100 - for aesthetic reasons). That is a considerable lower cost speaker than previously used, but again the focus was on goals and constraints rather than cost. They have worked out well. They have wide dispersion where it matters for a side or rear speaker, due to being a column of 2" wideband drivers. The relatively constrained vertical dispersion seems neither especially pro or con. They have sufficient headroom for the job. They blend just fine with the three JBL 708s up front and the 4 Pioneer/TAD S-ic891a ceiling height speakers.

I'm inclined to try the CBT for my open concept living room. Hence sitting at the

Movies isn't my interest, rather multichannel music.

My first thought is I would want wider dispersion speakers for surround. Especially if you're closer to one than the other, sounds localize at the speakers. Before height speakers, I would take a KEF or Tannoy coax and point it at the ceiling. So I would not consider LS50 Meta a good surround channel speaker. Technics C700 if you can find them would work a good deal better, if you want a coax standmount. NHT C3 is another good bookshelf for surround.

My second thought is looking at price is a little besides the point. Instead, work from goals and constraints and then see what it would cost to meet them.

In our previous house we used "expensive" sides (Pioneer/TAD S-IW891 with MSRP of $3800/pr - but did not pay that), and rears (NHT Classic Three). The sides used the same coax as our mains at first, but still worked just fine when we changed the mains for JBL 708i L/R and SCL-3 center. The only coax with wider dispersion than the TAD design is the flat Technics. The rears worked well because they had such wide dispersion, and Classic Three's weakest link (extreme HF) isn't a factor when they're behind you.

In our current system, there is a big placement/form factor constraint - the left side speaker had to be as thin as could be. That, coupled with some of the things in Sound Reproduction about using CBT arrays as surrounds, and the 2015 JBL Synthesis Atmos demo, led me to spec JBL CBT speakers for the sides (50) and rear (100 - for aesthetic reasons). That is a considerable lower cost speaker than previously used, but again the focus was on goals and constraints rather than cost. They have worked out well. They have wide dispersion where it matters for a side or rear speaker, due to being a column of 2" wideband drivers. The relatively constrained vertical dispersion seems neither especially pro or con. They have sufficient headroom for the job. They blend just fine with the three JBL 708s up front and the 4 Pioneer/TAD S-ic891a ceiling height speakers.

I'm inclined to try the CBT for open concept living room where to MLP is against the rear wall without side walls near it. Considering the rear surround speaker on the side of the couch; as well side surrounds almost at the location of the front wides, do you think CBT 50 will be appropriate? Moreover have you ever compared CBT50 and 70J? Is that particular differences between them in terms of SPL differences between a person sitting next to it vs. the one on the far side (assuming the speaker is put 90 degrees to the side) ? Thanks for your time.

 

[Descartes]

The best you can afford!

 

[risandipra]

The best you can afford!

Tell us more please

 

[Mr. Widget]

Do you find that in your opinion is it worth it having expensive surround sound speakers especially for movies?

As others have said, the requirements are different for music. Even for multi-channel music playback I still think you can compromise substantially on your surrounds since our hearing is forward focused. We simply do not hear as well as the sound gets slightly behind us, or overhead for that matter.

I use my surround system primarily for movies and I am able to use substantially smaller speakers for my surrounds and overhead speakers. The speakers I'm using are tiny but still have high SPL capabilities and I am extremely satisfied with the results. I do have to rely on the subwoofers to fill in the low end a bit more than ideal, but it has never seemed to be an issue. If the surrounds were SPL limited and were driven into distortion during loud passages then they wouldn't be satisfactory. But smaller and less costly surrounds can be just fine.

 

[risandipra]

As others have said, the requirements are different for music. Even for multi-channel music playback I still think you can compromise substantially on your surrounds since our hearing is forward focused. We simply do not hear as well as the sound gets slightly behind us, or overhead for that matter.

I use my surround system primarily for movies and I am able to use substantially smaller speakers for my surrounds and overhead speakers. The speakers I'm using are tiny but still have high SPL capabilities and I am extremely satisfied with the results. I do have to rely on the subwoofers to fill in the low end a bit more than ideal, but it has never seemed to be an issue. If the surrounds were SPL limited and were driven into distortion during loud passages then they wouldn't be satisfactory. But smaller and less costly surrounds can be just fine.

View attachment 385056

Is that Meyer Sound MM4?

 

[Mr. Widget]

Is that Meyer Sound MM4?

Yep, they work surprisingly well in my smallish home theater.

 

[jhaider]

I'm inclined to try the CBT for my open concept living room. Hence sitting at the

I'm inclined to try the CBT for open concept living room where to MLP is against the rear wall without side walls near it. Considering the rear surround speaker on the side of the couch; as well side surrounds almost at the location of the front wides, do you think CBT 50 will be appropriate? Moreover have you ever compared CBT50 and 70J? Is that particular differences between them in terms of SPL differences between a person sitting next to it vs. the one on the far side (assuming the speaker is put 90 degrees to the side) ? Thanks for your time.

First, I would avoid sitting against the rear wall if at all possible, and if you have to do that go 5.1 with sides at 90 deg or thereabouts.

Second, I would not turn a CBT, or any speaker, on its side.

Third, no personal experience with 70J. I'm sure it is better (wider horizontal dispersion over a larger bandwidth because of the tweeter line) but it was also too wide and deep for our application. But I think you need to go back to first premises before selecting equipment based on the above.

 

[Mr. Widget]

First, I would avoid sitting against the rear wall if at all possible, and if you have to do that go 5.1 with sides at 90 deg or thereabouts.

Second, I would not turn a CBT, or any speaker, on its side.

Third, no personal experience with 70J. I'm sure it is better (wider horizontal dispersion over a larger bandwidth because of the tweeter line) but it was also too wide and deep for our application. But I think you need to go back to first premises before selecting equipment based on the above.

The CBT 70J-1 or the CBT 50LA-1 MUST be operated vertically. These are line arrays and are surprisingly good if used appropriately.

 

[Descartes]

Tell us more please

Perlisten or KEF Reference Meta

 

[BJL]

I am curious to hear from
all those who own a surround sound system. Do you find that in your opinion is it worth it having expensive surround sound speakers especially for movies?

For example one could imagine
3 KEF Reference 2- Meta for the front channels and
6 KEF LS50 Meta for surround duties

Please share your opinion and your current setup.

I personally use all KEF LS50s

My personal preference is for a uniform set of speakers (& amplifiers) for the main seven in a surround system. I especially dislike so-called center channel speakers. I have also found designated surround speakers to be less than satisfactory, to me they throw off the tonal balance, even using Dirac (which is fairly good at getting the system to sound coherent.)

I also prefer floor standing speakers to bookshelf type, avoiding speaker stands, and to me, providing a better system sound. This is an impractical set up if the room is used for anything other than listening to music or watching movies as the speakers dominate the room. Fortunately for me, I have that luxury and have seven Revel F206 for the seven bed speakers. For front wide Atmos speakers I have Revel F36, also floor standing, close, but not as nice as the F206.