|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.205.227.82
Huge Flatscreen Televisions are good but apparently for some reason Large stereos and speakers hooked up to full sized componets are bad!?
Especially if the stereo is black, or looks like what it is... A Sound system. I don't get all the ruckus with the need to hide a sound system, or wireless speakers, or even the shame people have of owning something large or GASP! ten years old! Or doesnt have an ipod dock stuck in it!
To be honest the small sattelite/ artsy fartsy Mr roboto boom boxes look much worse (and sound) much worse than a full sized component system...
Two bookshelf speakers and a center speaker under the TV, dont notice em too much, Two floorstanders one center. Dont notice em much.
Tiny sattelites or robot shaped mini hifi tucked in the corner. My brain screams, HMMM Boombox! or, HOME THEATER System! and I think to myself PLEASE! dont play any music!
The smallest I would be willing to go are the Onkyo, Denon, and the sony G-series micro hifi, which looks as if someone at Sony saw A Rotel or Music hall set of seperates and copied the design and the speakers remind me of B&Ws
Those tiny little cute/sattilite speakers + subwoofer combo things NEVER sound as good as a of decent set of bookshelf speakers paired with a nice sub. Cringe worthy highs, muddy mid and nothing smooth below 120hz..
Even more expensive satelite subwoofer combo sets don't do well in the mids the sub-woofer is always too darn boomy and overpowers the speakers.
Has the time come when we feel the need to phase out Full sized stereo and HT components? the space gained from fetting rid of a pair of big box speakers and a standard sized stereo rack is negligible IMO.
The less physical media we have the less Hifi components we have in are system and that's a bad thing. the more we converge things into one box that does it all the worse off the audio industry and Hifi is.
Follow Ups:
When it's dark, all you see is a giant projection screen.
When the lights are on, you can see the giant loudspeakers. Actually, not all that many, just BIG!
Best theatre sound I ever heard. One does not pay ONE IOTA of attention to the sound. That is the way it should be!!!
projector? Possibly one day.
But I already have two other systems with TV's, it affects the imaging and timing - it should do and it does. I'm probably more bothered by this than most, because I prefer real stereo acoustic music.
IME flat screens have less of an impact though the front area is bigger, but large CRT TV's had big fat sides quite close to the speakers.
IME hanging a nice quilt over the screen doesn't hurt when it's just audio, some flat pillows or even layers of BAF stitched to the back of the quilt might increase the absorption and its bandwidth. The bedroom system has a quilt, and I will be buying a quilt for the Family Room/Kitchen/HT/Surround system when I buy a bigger flat screen, size not set as yet. The current LED TV will go to the bedroom and replace the big old CRT and I expect the music to sound better.
LBNL most people don't care about audio quality.
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
for directional speakers.
Bass is supposed to sound big. 6.5" is not a woofer size.
I don't understand what that's all about. Maybe you should change your speakers if they are that easily influenced by big screen
I can hear the effect of a reflective surface near speakers, but you can't.
Wrong hobby?
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
You shouldn't place your speakers in front of the display. If the speakers are placed ahead of the display, your primary concern of reflections would be the side walls, directly behind the display and ceiling/floor bounce.
The only time a display would make a difference is if the left right speakers were omni directional. I'm in the right hobby mate, just a wee bit more informed than you is all.
...but if you have your speakers optimized for movies, they won't be in the best position for music. As long as you know it's a trade off going in.......
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
I have a 2 channel audio/video system and this position also works great for Video as voices appear to come from the TV screen which is in the center between my two speakers.Action such as something flying or a horse moving galloping one side of the screen to the other extends way beyond my TV's boundaries to outside of the boundaries of my two speakers.
So in 2 channel I can't imagine the set up for audio and video being different. However I have read that the optimal placement of the left and right speakers is different for 2 channel stereo and 5 channel surround sound. Is this perhaps what you mean?
Perhaps something like 2 channel stereo for music and multichannel surround for movies? Some folks also listen in multichannel surround of music and movies. And others like me listen in 2 channel stereo for music and movies.
However I get even better phantom center channel imaging with NO TV in the room. I was without a TV for many years, with the same speakers, preamp and amp I have now and the imaging and realism was to a higher level with no TV monitor in the room. However I like movies and TV and can't afford anything larger than a studio apartment so what can I do? If I was rich I would have two rooms, one for stereo music only and one for stereo video only with large TV. I abhor surround sound.
"Happy Listening,
Teresa."
Edits: 07/26/12
There is typically a narrow sweet spot for 2 channel listening to get the most out of a speaker's imaging capabilities. Switch this to video and surround 5.1 and the sweet spot now becomes much larger and less defined in imaging. The reason for that are two fold; a.) The display forces the distance between left and right speaker to grow beyond optimal placement for most 2 channel setups and the sound track is now dispersed between 3 speakers instead of two.
Teresa, if the listening position is dead center of the display, then you won't need the center channel to anchor the sound to the display. The center channel comes into use once the listening position grows beyond 20 to 30 degrees off center from the display.
My setup equipped with center channel is still optimized for 2 channel listening as my distance between the speakers is less than the distance from each speaker to the listening position. The imaging I get is life like and did not improve after I removed the display to get some wiring done. The trade off is that I'm not receiving the full benefits from my HD display becasue I sit too far away from it to see the benefits.
The placement of the front peakers for 5.1 and higher is the same as for 2 channel stereo, you should gt the same sweet spot and imaging as you did before you added the centre and rears. Most 2 channel setups have speakers toed in. and the same should be for 5.1 if your speakers are directional.
I always thought that if a speaker has to be toed in then the speaker may have a very narrow sweet spot. certain speakers like the KEF IQ series have this problem due to the easily localized HF driver.
Placement of left/right speakers have different contraints then two channel and are different. The fact that one introduces a large display which may cause the physical position to change from non optimal 2 channel psition relative to the listening can be the biggest factor. Toe in can only do so much.
If you bought a Display so big that you cannot place the speakers in the best position to allow for the proper listening of music, then you have problems. no normal sized room should have a display bigger than 46 inches... Unless you have enough room on either side as to not have to place the speakers in a compromising position.
That does makes sense. Thanks for helping me understand. I would never have figured that out.
Your original post makes no sense. What are you talking about?
I optimized by left right main speaker placement for 2 channel sound where imaging is very important to me. For HT purposes, one has more flexibility in L/R speaker placement.
Funny.. I have small HDTV (22 inch) and realitively large old floor speakers.. May upgrade to a 32 inch later and possibly get some "new" speakers....
I also have a pair of standmounts on stands! EPI Model 70 series III they were made when EPI became a division of Harman Kardon so they dont have the air spring tweeter, but a phenolic ring tweeter instead... different enclosure too.
As for modern slimline speakers, they sound fine. Small sats however have trouble where the sub crosses over, because the higher you tune the crossover the more localized the sub-woofer is.
not true leggie, i have magneplanar MMGs setting nest to but slightly behind the front plane of the 52" screen. alternatively i use spendor s3/5s on stands in about the same position.
left spkr right spkr
--------- ----------
------------------------------------------
screen
in this arrangement, the sonic image SNAPS into focus as opposed to having them in the same plane or in front of the plane of the screen. i have a screen mounted shelf for the center on the top of the screen. i dont use the center nor have i hooked it up as i use dynaquad for ambience retrieval instead of the true 5.1 setup. pretty good sound. i do have the components to do the 5.1 but i am not motivated to do the setup. i know, i know, multichannel sounds great (on some well recorded material properly mixed for realism and not showmanship).
this system is NOT boomy and were it so, i would adjust the sub level and xover point to squelch that occurrence. and i don't support the trend to put things all in one box. and no, the system does not need to be invisible. one system that embraces appearance and sound quality is the maggie mmgc series:
http://magnepan.com/30-Day_trial_motorized_MMC_2
explore the maggie site. these CAN be less visible. but really, the sound of a good system can enhance the home and the relationship of the people in it as it provides an excellent reason to be home rather than out drinking or doing things with others besides the family. the women should appreciate that.
SF tech is right. bose catered to a market but that doesn't mean that the men should just buckle and allow that. i was fortunate in that my wife loved music and accommodated the whole shebang. she could really hear and the system enhanced TV watching in those days before big screens.
sudz, a big screen many times occupies the space between the speakers in homes where we must share the room with the family. personally i enjoy the visual aspect of music.
...regards...tr
"Huge Flatscreen Televisions are good but apparently for some reason Large stereos and speakers hooked up to full sized componets are bad!?"Where did you get this hearsay? Can you point to anything in print?
There are small and large versions of every single product you can name.
If you are talking WAF, well then WAF applies to everything as well, not just audio products.
Same old "people are against audio" without citing any examples?
Have you listened to a modern day slimline speaker, they are nothing like you describe. Based on looks, I would think that a flat soundbar mounted to the wall under a tv can't be any good, or a bunch of small satellites with 3 or 4 inch woofers. But they make surprisingly passable sound, and the fact is there is not a whole lot of difference between those and the audiophile-approved products I stick to.
It may seem like a huge difference, but take a few steps back from microscope view, and there is surprisingly little difference in overall sound quality.
Edits: 07/24/12
My system seems to blend in so well it is hardly visible!
.
.
nt
Appearance always comes first. It's immoral to have a 10 room house where appearance is the most important thing in 9 but you have one where something else is more important. This prevalence of this attitude is how you know we live in a completely female dominated society.
I care about sound quality, however just like everything else I demand my stereo equipment to look lovely. For me that is smooth simplistic black faceplates with as few controls as possible and only the turn-on light. Speakers in beveled enclosures made with nice looking high quality wood and acoustically transparent but physically opaque grill cloths on so the speakers themselves are hidden. Equipment stands made of nice looking wood that compliment the decor rather than utility-looking ugly metal.
Just ask two questions: Is it pretty? Is it ugly? If it's pretty and sounds great buy it, if it's ugly most women will hate it no matter what it sounds like.
"Happy Listening,
Teresa."
Makers of small satellite speakers?IMHO speakers should be floor standing with woofers 12 inch or larger.
I like components that are black with no lights or meters, I tolerate the turn on indicator lights. But refuse to buy equipment in which the "on" indicator light turns to another color instead of off. Boom boxes, mini systems and mid-fi are often a light show with multicolor lights, I hate bells and whistles it is all so gaudy.
A big screen TV needs a big sounding sound system to complement it. If anyone is suggesting tiny speakers, boom boxes and other silly things just tell them "You're so wrong!" Perhaps hang around with a different crowd.
"Happy Listening,
Teresa."
Edits: 07/23/12
nt.
Although, I am not quite sure what to make of it! ;-)
SF
Funny thinng is I Actually love amps and EQ's with dpectrum displays and digitla readouts.. Its the one billion Star trek flashing Double bass boost buttons they put on those mini hifis that make my eyes bleed!
Bose Ruined hifi when they came out with those lifestyle systems...
Some of the small settelite systems are pretty good but those ar e made by companies that actually care more about what it sounds like before they make it look good.. Still cant replace a decent set of standmounts or floorstanders though...
Having the tweeters and midrange drivers in as little cabinet as possible is indeed a good idea along with having the woofer in its own isolated chamber.... Kef did it first then other companies decided to seperate it even further, with a mono woofer and two speakers...
I don't agree... Bose only catered to a market that was already there. Lots of people don't really care about "hifi" at all. And that's fine.
It's the evangelistic pissing contests among the various "converted" that really bother me.
SF
What does a huge flat screen have to do with audio?
"What does a huge flat screen have to do with audio?"
Hee-hee-hee-heeeee..............
If you can keep this tongue in cheek, self deprecating approach alive with your persona, I think I could get used to your posts.
High Five. Keep it up. One of Us, One of Us, One of Us!!!
... Lots of musical performances are recorded on video, DVD & Blu-ray.
Smile
Sox
Even if I had a 78 Sqft apt I'd still have big speakers! and if a partner ever tells me go get rid of big speakers and get liffle ones she's out on the bloody street ain't letting no one tell me what I cant have and what I can't in a place I live in!
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: