surround sound setups

[VinylHanger]

I usually run a 5.1 system in the front room. I use the same receiver for 2.1 channel. Mainly because I really like the sound of my H/K AVR 254. I run a Proton receiver as a phono pre and then into a DBX-4X expander. This runs into Klipsch KG 3.5's in front and KG-3.2's in the rear with a B&W ASW 1000 sub. It works for me.

I will put a proper phono pre in along with a second B&W sub eventually, but it sounds pretty good now. There are a set of H/K mono blocks on the workbench, I'll get them fixed eventually then I'll be done.

I used to have various speakers setups with a speaker switcher and a couple of amp switchers all daisy chained together. I think I could do like 6 amps and 13 speakers sets in any combination, but it just got to be too much and looked like ass. I am Jones'n to get one more set of speakers in the front room, but it isn't necessary.

How do I think of it? As a music system first. I listen to way more music than I do movies, but it does that equally well. The sub isn't necessary, but it fills in the bottom nicely and if I'm cranking it, I can adjust the crossover in the receiver to take some of the load off the amp section. I don't have any multi channel music, so I don't know about that end of things.

 

[DougMac]

Thx

My HT is THX certified...

For the sake of clarity, do you mean your HT (AV) receiver is THX qualified? The reason I'm asking is that THX will actually test and certify home theaters. It's a lengthy and expensive process and performed on HT's that are well in the six figure range.

We have three setups. One is in the living room upstairs and is used for casual listening and TV watching. It's stereo at the moment, but can be 5.1. I have a stereo system in my office/den downstairs. It includes two turntables, a cassette deck and a RTR. I listen to music while I pay bills do computer stuff. I also use it to restore records from my collection, primarily 78's. Lastly we have a dedicated HT with 7.1. I do some two channel listening, but usually when we're in there we're watching TV or a movie. I can play DVD-A and SACD's, but I have a very small collection. DSOTM is pretty impressive in surround sound, though. It has the best gear at the moment.

Maybe when I retire I'll have more time for "serious" listening and may invest in a better 2 channel setup, but right now I just don't use my 2 channel setup enough to justify a heavy investment.

 

[satkinsn]

What is this 'retire' of which you speak?

When you say of the upstairs system "It's stereo at the moment..." I assume you mean, two speakers wired in and the HT receiver set to stereo. How's it sound?

s.

 

[DougMac]

Only a Dream

What is this 'retire' of which you speak?

When you say of the upstairs system "It's stereo at the moment..." I assume you mean, two speakers wired in and the HT receiver set to stereo. How's it sound?

s.

Retire, n. A concept so elusive and obscure it's not even listed in "The Devil's Dictionary". If pressed, it could be defined as the phantom carrot at the end of the ever lengthening stick of a life of toil.

The upstairs system consists of a Panasonic SA-XR57 that I bought for cheap just to hear "digital" amps. It's driving Boston Acoustics CR-9's with no subwoofer. I have an old carousel CD player and the TV as sound sources.

It sounds pretty good, but the nature of the room prevents anything approximating serious listening. The living room/dining room/kitchen is one large area with a 22' vaulted ceiling. The bookcase/TV cabinets on either side of the fireplace are custom, requiring the speakers to be placed on shelves nearly 8' high. There's no way to effectively change the layout and with other listening spaces, there's really no need.

The little Panny actually doesn't sound that bad. The Boston Acoustics CR-9 have served me well over the 15+ years I've owned them.

 

[tiga]

Like several here I have two systems - a dedicated 2-channel system (vintage) and HT system based on an Onkyo sr606 receiver and Sony Blu-ray player. I play music on both - and it sounds great on both.

2.1 comes alive when I use the Audyssey EQ software along with it's Dynamic EQ funtion. I also get some enjoyment out of using the Onkyo matrixed surround functions as well - especially their "Studio-Mix" setting. It's a mixed bag of course, some sources don't matrix well at all. When it works I sit there knowing that this isn't how the music was recorded or intended to be played - but since it sounds so good, I just go with it.

 

[tx_polkhead]

I live in an fairly big open loft and the main audio system in the 'living room' space does fair duty at both 7.1 and stereo. The 7 speakers are all mid 80's Polk Audio with similar mids and tweeters to help voice match. The mains are beefy RTA12C's, the center is a modded Monitor 7C, and the side and rear surrounds are Monitor 5JR+'s. The sub which I use for both HT and music is an Infinity Interlude IL100S. The AVR is a Pioneer Elite VSX-90TXV, fairly basic by today’s standards but can push the speakers well. Someday I would like to add dedicated amps for some real power but for the limited money I have spent I am very happy. The sources for HT is a simple LG Bluray, and for music I use a Denon DVD changer that handles CD and HDCD music like a champ. The AVR is also fed lossless audio through a digital coax connection from the computer via iTunes. This is a big step up from the previous Acoustic Research HT in a box with a Sony AVR I had just a few short years ago. The little sat/sub system was 'fun' for movies but very thin when asked to deliver music.
I think the biggest improvements lately have come from sitting down with the AVR manual and an SPL meter on a tripod and tweaking levels manually rather than using the mic and auto set-up. It's a fun hobby and I'm sure I will keep tweaking this and that. Nothing is perfect or set in stone, but it is a good compromise in a home I share with a wife and two kids.
Lastly, I recently discovered I can switch the rear surrounds to the 'B' speakers with a couple of clicks of the remote. For gatherings I roll with dual stereo or 4.1 which I think sounds better than any of the Dolby or DTS Neo music modes.
Having fun and ‘listening’ to more music now than ever before!

 

[midnitejazz]

I have always ran with 2 separate systems; each one optimized for their specific purpose. My 2.1 channel rig is upstairs in my living room and is optimized for music. I have a 6.2 channel home theatre system mainly for movies and is located in the basement but it also serves as a back up 2.2 music system.

The 6.2 system consists of a PS3, Panasonic SA-XR70 6.1 Class D receiver driving 2 Athena powered subs, a pair of Paradigm Studio 40v4 mains, Paradigm Atom v2 surrounds and Paradigm CC-170 front and rear. The Panny receiver when switched to 2 channel goes into Bi-amp mode and sounds quite decent.

The details of my 2.1 music system is in my signature.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

The surround systems are great for surround and movies, lousy at 2 channel. Our 2 channel system doesn't need subwoofers or bass management. With surround systems, usually both are needed. I like my Stereo experience and Surround experiences with the tools well suited for the job. Both need their own tools. Otherwise, you get too many compromises. If we could only have one, Stereo would prevail and our movies would be in Stereo.

 

[24HACKER]

I have a 5.1 system with Paradigm speakers with an Onkyo amp with a sub. I don't listen to much music over this system (cable blues when I am in the mood) . It is an OK system for movies and such, but for real music the JBL L-100's or the DQ-10's are hard to beat IMHO.

 

[whoaru99]

The surround systems are great for surround and movies, lousy at 2 channel.

This is your opinion in regard to your system, or your gross generalization of all surround systems?

 

[cwall99]

All -

I did a lousy job asking this question a couple weeks back, and with your forbearance, I'd like to try again.

Aside from your two channel system(s), do you run a multi-channel system? Why, yes, I do.

If so, what?

I have the following gear in my main system:

• Philips AF-829 turntable (but this thread really isn't about that) with a Shure M97-xE cartridge
• An Oppo DV-980H mainly for multi-channel music (SACD and DVD-A) as well as standard res CDs
• A Pioneer Elite VSX-82TXS AVR
• My ComCast cable box
• Panasonic DMP-BD655 Blu-Ray player for DVDs and Blu Ray disks
• B&W DM603 s3 for my left and right main speakers (bi-wired and bi-amped using the two unused channels on the AVR)
• B&W LCR600 s3 for my center channel
• NHT 1.3As as my surround speakers
• Earthquake SuperNova MkV-15 subwoofer

And is it a 'music' system or a 'movie' system, in the way you think of it, have it tuned, etc.

I use it as an all-around system, movies, tv, and music (though music generally only when I have time alone in the room. I'm fortunate in that it sure seems, at least with my gear in my room, that tuning it for music also leads to exceptional results with movies.

Do you run it with or without a sub? Why?

Yes, I use a sub. I think my B&W speakers are excellent speakers, but they bail out down around 40 Hz. Using a subwoofer allows me to put the signal where it can be reproduced most effectively by a specific driver in the system. I have all my speakers set at small, but the crossover set at 50 Hz (THX specifies 80 Hz for the xover, but I'd like to let my speakers run a little lower). Then that subwoofer kicks in, and, man, does it ever round out the sound and add an almost visceral presence to the music (listen to Pink Floyd's DSotM on a 5.1 SACD and just feel those big bass notes at the beginning of Time... gets me smiling just thinking about it).

And most important, is your multi-channel system part of your two channel system, or vice versa, or not at all?

Yes, my AVR pulls double-duty, being the heart of both my music and video system. I'm pretty fortunate in that my speakers do really well playing both music and movies. Then again, I believe that if you have speakers that do well with music, they'll also do well with movies. After all, it's about reproducing accurately whatever is in the signal.

I'm really, really curious about how much overlap there is between two channel fans and folks who like multi-channel music, or movies, or both.

s.

Hope this helps.

 

[tcdriver]

Aside from your two channel system(s), do you run a multi-channel system? If so, what? And is it a 'music' system or a 'movie' system, in the way you think of it, have it tuned, etc.

My main listening system is a dedicated 5.1 channel “music” system set up in a dedicated music listening room. The room is on the smaller side, 10’ 8” x 11’ 4”, so fitting everything in and having it sound good was something of a challenge. The room started out as a dedicated two-channel listening room, morphed into quadraphonic (four channel) and ended up as a 5.1 channel music listening room. I do have a 13” video monitor in the room that I use to navigate the menus found on some music discs. Video watching is done on a dedicated two-channel system in another room.

Speaker setup is pretty close to the ITU standard, with three identical Celestion speakers in the front and two Celestion speakers for Left Surround and Right Surround. Although the front and surround speakers are not identical, they use the very same drivers and are a pretty close match sonically, which helps create an optimum soundfield. Having three identically matched speakers in the front is critical for optimum multi-channel performance.

Do you run it with or without a sub? Why?

Yes, I have and use a “sub” woofer in my 5.1 music listening system for two reasons. First, the Celestions are small “bookshelf” sized monitors that while they do a decent job on most bass material, they can not reproduce the very lowest frequencies. So, I use a pair of AR3 loudspeakers driven by a Heathkit AA-29 to fill in the lower end of the system. This is the case whether I am listening in mono, two-channel stereo or 5.1 channel. Second, some music sources have 5.1 channels of information, meaning that there is a separate “0.1” channel that is part of the music. Having the “sub” woofer channel in my system allows me to listen to the whole 5.1 channels of sound without having to downmix to 5.0.

And most important, is your multi-channel system part of your two channel system, or vice versa, or not at all?

My 5.1 channel system is used to play all types of music formats including monophonic, two-channel stereo, three-channel stereo, four-channel stereo, 5.0 and 5.1 in various formats including mono, stereo two-channel and four-channel LP records, cassette tapes and CDs and popular multi-channel formats (dts-CD, SACD, DVD-A, Dolby-Digital and Dolby Surround). Whatever format or number of channels I am using to play back my music sources, the system is optimally set up. Nothing is lost when playing a two-channel stereo recording in two-channel stereo. The image and soundstage are optimum for my listening room. My usual practice, when demonstrating my system, is to start with a monophonic selection, then two-channel stereo and then multi-channel music. The listener can then judge the quality of the mono, two-channel stereo and multi-channel sound.

(I am actually playing "Kind of Blue" from an LP, in multichannel, as I type this. ) This, however, I am doing with a patch that doesn't try to do put the vocals in the center, for instance. It still has a very stereo sound, but it fills the room (and the flaws in the room) better..

Kind of Blue is available on SACD with a multi-channel mix that includes the original three channels from the original three-channel master tapes. I find the three channel version a small but significant improvement over the mixed-down two-channel stereo version which is also included on the same SACD. Recommended.

 

[madpioneer]

Link below is my main system for BOTH stereo music listening & surround sound.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=290981

I have a small home & a very small living area. On top of that I wanted to be able to use the same front speakers for music or surround sound without having to use a second pair.
Using a PIONEER VSX-9500S surround receiver/amp for switching sources & Dolby processing running the center & rears linked to my SPEC pre-amp/amp that run the fronts. Both amps running together to produce surround effect, each amp running their prespective speakers.

I have been running this setup like this for many years.

The results do not require more speakers in my already packed area.
Tons of headroom.
Using the remote volume on the surround amp changes overall volume even on the vintage SPEC amp.
More ability to balance fronts vs center & rears with my SPEC's controls.
Just to name a few....

How does it sound??

My son & I watched 'the Expendables' yesterday on Blu Ray he commented how not only did it sound like we were actually there, but how the explosion rumblings shook the couch.

 

[Keessie]

I have a stereo setup for the pc and a HT 6.0 set for the tv

Pc setup:
Amp:
Akai AM-2600
Speakers:
Jamo D-165 (still there for the moment till i got better ones)

HT set
Receiver: Yamaha RX-V590
Front Speakers:
Technics SB-L60
Technics SB-R4
Rear:
Technics SB-4

 

[cwall99]

Any research to back that up? Just asking. I believe high-end HT is more prevalant than you think.

I agree. Especially if you go into any of the boutique shops that specializes in configuring HT (along with alarm systems and other technologies). :thmbsp:

 

[cwall99]

I'd have to disagree with the gross generalization, KT, unless you're speaking of your own gear. My HT playing in 2-ch mode has nothing to be ashamed of. In fact, it sounds darn good.

I have to agree. When listening to stereo sources on my system, the imaging is so good that I often finding myself, even when I know I'm listening in stereo, getting up just to make sure nothing's coming out of the center channel. How much of that is due to the speakers and how much is due to the AVR, I dunno. But I'm really pleased with both in my system.

Imaging is crazy good. Details... etc... I really like it. I like going to the SMAC events and listening to some pretty spectacular 2-channel rigs. Even though my system is decidedly mid-fi, I've yet to feel ashamed of what I have when I get home. Generally, I feel like, "Geez, I paid about 10% of what that guy paid for his system, and I have at least 85% of the performance."

Actually, the only time I felt like I might want to upgrade anything was after spending some time listening to a pair of Dahlquists (DQ-10 - is that a legitimate model number?).

 

[satkinsn]

tcdriver, cwall -

Thanks for taking the time to write the detail. It's really interesting - I can't help but ask tcdriver, do you run a separate HT setup?

tks,

s.

 

[Infinitoid]

I run two stereo only systems: Original large Advents powered by a 50wpc Onkyo receiver, and Infinity Overture 3s powered by an old 80wpc Denon integrated amp. Both give me an immense amount of pleasure. But the best sound is still in the AV room with Infinity Interlude IL60s, a DefTech sub, Carver M-1.5t power amp, and an Onkyo 7.1 receiver. So the system that should, based on popular wisdom, sound worst, sounds best. It's in a sealed room with the best dimensions and the best speakers. Unfortunately it is also the system that I get least access to on a solo basis. That's OK, too. Makes me appreciate those rare moments even more.

 

[JoeESP9]

All -

I did a lousy job asking this question a couple weeks back, and with your forbearance, I'd like to try again.

Aside from your two channel system(s), do you run a multi-channel system?

If so, what?
.

Yes, I also run a multichannel system.

And is it a 'music' system or a 'movie' system, in the way you think of it, have it tuned, etc.
.

It's IMO a very good music system with added multichannel capability of close to the same quality.

Do you run it with or without a sub? Why?.

All four of my speakers (no center- I use phantom mode) are full range electrostatics. They need a sub or subs to get realistic bass. My front ESL's are biamped with two 12" Transmission Line subs crossed over at 80Hz. My rear ESL's are biamped with a dual woofer cabinet (two subs in one box) that's crossed over at 100Hz

And most important, is your multi-channel system part of your two channel system, or vice versa, or not at all?.

My multichannel system is an extension of my two channel system. All two channel sources are connected directly to my ARC preamp. From that the signals go to my front electronic crossover, to my front amps and front speakers. Two channel is strictly two channel. All multi-channel sources are connected to my Lexicon processor. The front outputs go through my preamp (in bypass mode) and the rest of my two channel setup. All rear multichannel signals go directly from the processor to the crossover, amplifiers and speakers for the rear channels.

I'm really, really curious about how much overlap there is between two channel fans and folks who like multi-channel music, or movies, or both.
s.

I like both. That's why my multichannel system is an extension of my two channel system. All my gear is in a dedicated acoustically treated room. I can't afford two separate high quality systems. Nor do I have the room. For me, my setup is the best way to solve the problem of two channel versus multichannel.

 

[newrival]

I run both.
I downsized from 7.2 to 5.1 because of a new room, but will soon be back to 7.2 or 9.2
Multi-channel at the moment:
Polk RT5000p system (Reference Theater)
-CS1000p Center (w/ two 6.5" powered subwoofers)
-RT3000p Mains (w/ two 8" powered subwoofers each)
-F/X1000 surrounds
LFE sub - Dayton Titanic mkIII
Pioneer Elite VSX-84TXSi Receiver
Sunfire Cinema Grand Amplifier
SiliconDust Homerun HD TV tuner for OTA HD broadcast
PS3 - BDP and games
HTPC (intel core i5, 4TB storage, 8GB DDR3 RAM, radeon 5770HD 1gb DDR5)
Denon DVD-2910 - SACD player
Samsung 52" DLP tv

Main stereo:
Polk Audio SRS (Signature Reference System)
Classe Audio Seventy
Audible Illusions Modulus 3b
Sony S9000es SACD
Empire Troubadour 598 mkIII turntable (Denon dl-103r)
DIY stepup transformer
Squeezebox touch or MacBook Pro
Audio-gd NFB-2 DAC

I used to have a complete Polk SDA-based HT setup but have moved them to strictly Stereo listening and enjoy them more in this regard. The RT5000p system is geared specifically to HT and does a fantastic job. I've enjoyed the results of having 2 independent systems.