Comments on: Two-channel home theater vs. sound bar speakers

It's a dirty little secret: So-called sound bar speakers are merely glorified stereo speakers.

[Chapmaniac]

I purchased an Onkyo home theater in the box system for just about $500. 7.1 Surround sound without a DVD player (my preference - after all, who wants a DVD player integrated with their receiver?). Yes, wiring up 7 speakers can be a bit of a challenge - but it's worth it when the "right" movie comes around (pun intended). Most movies don't make adequate use of those back channels but a few make excellent use of them. Those that do make the experience memorable!

[iconoclastech]

Good point on the stereo. I recently built a system using similar principles

Onkyo TX-SR506: http://www.us.onkyo.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR506&class=Receiver&p=i
2 Polk Monitor 50s: http://www.polkaudio.com/homeaudio/products/monitor50/
and a BIC Accoustech h100 sub: http://bicamerica.com/showpage.php?brand=1&type=8&spkrID=26

Part of the advantage is that I spend $650 total for the lot, and can add a pair or two of matching Polk Monitor 30s as surrounds for $100 plus the price of hangers at any time.

[jakebala]

Steve, I have to say I truly enjoy your posts about audio and this is definitely one of them.

I have personally taken your recommendations. I am only 22 yrs old and I have better sound than my parents and friends' parents who make tons more money than I do. I did this by spending 1000.

I bought the Onkyo TX-SR606 which got a good review from cnet as well as the previous gen 605. I bought that b/c I want to upgrade to surround eventually b/c I am more of a movie watcher than a music stereo person. I have the Onkyo not upconverting and it passes through my videogames and movies really well to my TV with its 4 HDMI inputs.

The speakers I got were a deal, I wanted Polk or Klipsch but I got Boston Accoustic which still sound real good. I got the HS 450 floorstanders that stand in well for no subwoofer b/c the bass is phenomenal. And it is hard to place the sound (which is great I love it), a few times my gf will ask if the person down the hall is listening to their heavy bass music when it's just the movie we're watching b/c she can't place it. Also I have the HS 225 center channel and that is great for voices for TV and Movies.

I also calibrated it with a SPL I got from radioshack. It's great knowing that everyone is getting the best sound possible even if they're not straight in front of the TV. I also turned the speakers in so that the people to the right don't get too much right channel and not enough left.

Every once in a while I'll put a CD in and revel in the great sound coming from my Beatles or Allman bros. The sound is phenomenal, the only bad part is that when I get into the car or stream music from the computer at work it just sounds awful.

I love this blog b/c it teaches me about the wonder of music and sound. Only 2 yrs ago I wanted the Bose lifestyle speakers. Now I love the look of Emotiv and Klipsch and all those 50 thousand dollar speakers you write about.

All I can say is give me more about making systems and matching speakers!!!!!

[hexjones]

I think surround sound is over-rated. We only have two ears.

When I watch a movie and hardly hear anything from the rears when there is a sudden crash from the rear left, I feel that it takes me out of the movie.

[cyberDJ-2038765336053745013836]

You have two ears..and a brain. Therefore, you can localize audio directionality from ALL angles.
A properly set-up home theater comes fairly close to reproducing most of that experience.

[paskunyak]

Steve,
One of your best posts, please keep up the good work/advice. Two channel for movies make sense for a lot of people, especially those of us in small apartments.

Now, when oh when are you going to deliver that article on a modest priced home stereo speaker based system($3k) you promised when you did the piece on a headphone based system many months ago? C'mon Steve, we are waiting!

[cyberDJ-2038765336053745013836]

This article makes sense for those who can't do surround properly.
Whether the reason is financial or structural, a decent pair of speakers and a receiver will elevate the standard TV/movie viewing experience to a level not attainable with a half-assed surround solution.

However, If you have the means, take the time to do a proper system.
There is no reason the speakers Steve featured can't be expanded to a 5/6/7.1 system.
High-end audiophile components are great for the theater, also.
The key is the receiver. Make sure it has the balls to deliver good power into ALL channels.

[Dalkorian]

Your point about the receiver (meaning "amplifier" I'm sure:)) being key is right on the money. I have a trick with receivers that gives a clue (NOTHING BEATS LISTENING, but sometimes you can filter out the trash with some tricks) - pick it up. If you think "wow, is this thing made of lead or something?", then listen to it. It's probably a good powerful and gutsy amp. If on the other hand you pick it up and think "wow, this is light!", then it's likely junk. Wattage doesn't mean squat, I've heard 50W per channel amps that simply stomped all over 200W per channel amps. IT TAKES CURRENT TO DRIVE SPEAKERS AND NO ONE RATES THE CURRENT OUTPUT OF THEIR AMPS.

[ca128]

Mr. Guttenberg,

I respect your articles (digital and in print) but we should emphasize that the soundbar folks aren't only worried about stringing wires. They're more concerned about the aesthetics and one piece real estate of Soundbars.

None of your described 2.1 setups <look> as good.

- CA

[Dalkorian]

I personally never understood the concept of buying audio equipment on the basis that it looked good. I buy pictures that look good, I buy audio equipment that SOUNDS good.

[mhampton]

Enjoyed and agreed with this column.

For a lot of reasons, a 5/6/7.1 approach won't work for several rooms in my house.

I have the Zvox Mini for one TV, and the SoundmattersHD for another one in my house. I got both used on eBay to try out for a few months. I have also spent quite a bit of time in the stores listening to the the following soundbars - Yahama YSP, Sony Ht-CT100, Philips, Denon DHT-FS3 and 5, etc.

I have finally come to the same conclusion as you, Steve, that for all of these systems digital theatrics, the spread of the sound - the soundstage, just isn't that good.

However, the one thing I like about the Zvox and Soundmatters systems are the simple plug and play approach of leading a single headphone or RCA lineout to the speaker, then simply using the TV/Sat remote to control volume, as well as eliminate a whole component (AV receiver). In this regard, the sound is "always on" and easy for the entire family to adjust.

I may very well go to a 2.0 setup as you describe, but I plan to go to a store and audition the Audioengine A2 and A5 self powered speakers, as they provide their own internal amplifier and a simple line in, like the Zvox and Soundmatters boxes, but they also provide - as you note in this column - a fuller range of sound and a wider soundstage than a single box by providing a simple stereo bookshelf speaker solution to this problem.

The audioengine speakers get rave reviews at amazon.com and in all web searches I've found, but there's no review of their products at CNET? You can find out more about these speakers at http://www.audioengineusa.com

Why don't you get a pair of A5's, and maybe their new subwoofer for a separate/combined test with a TV, and give this equipment a workout and report it in your column. I'd love to hear if it sounds any good to you as a TV sound solution...

[John72953]

As a regular contributor in a certain forum we get tons of questions about how to start with building a proper HT setup. One of the things we always try to keep people away from is your basic HTIB, as it's a quick fix . What we do instead is advise people to go slow by getting a proper receiver and 2 or 3 speakers to start with (2 fronts-1 Centre Channel) and then build from there.

I started with a Yamaha HTR-6190B A/V receiver (Canadian model and equivalent to the RX-V1800). I then added 2 Totem Sttaf Floorstanders, a Totem Mite-T Centre Channel and then 2 Totem Mites fro rear channel duty. It took me 2 years to put this together, but I couldn't happier. I don't have a subwoofer jusy et, as I don't truly feel a need for one.

Like you said Steve....QUALITY over Quantity every time.

Good blog post Steve!

[Dalkorian]

Take your time with the sub, try some different models out. When you find the right one, you'll know it. It was years ago when I built my system and I also took years to put it all together. When it came to the sub, I tried dozens of models (I was lucky, working in an audio shop at the time) and most of them were pitiful. Lots of boom, no definition. When I tried the one I own now (Velodyne ULD-15), it was a night and day difference. The one I tried was the floor model and needed to be returned the next morning (besides, the cabinet was black and didn't match anything else I owned), but I was literally crying when I took it from my system. I ordered one within an hour of getting to work that morning.

The system I ended up with? Nakamichi TA-3A receiver (75W/channel, stasis design), Nakamichi CDP-2A that was later modified by upgrading the op-amps (OMG, this CD player still gives me orgasms - still the best sounding CD player under $2,000 I've ever heard), B&O RL-140's and my beloved Velodyne ULD-15. This system still brings chills to my spine after 18 years and makes me feel all giddy and excited when I fire it up - just what an audio system is supposed to do. Surround sound isn't really even necessary, the image it portrays when set up right is nearly comparable to a surround system (it doesn't wrap around behind you of course, but images well beyond the outside of the speakers themselves).

Oh, and NONE of my neighbors believe that receiver is only 75W per channel, but it is.

;-)

[sgranty]

Hi Steve,
Thought you and readers might be interested in this B&W podcast 'Is Surround Sound Worth it?' http://www.bowers-wilkins.co.uk/display.aspx?infid=3534

[just_a_reader]

A well set up stereo system can provide a well rounded movie experience. I myself have a stereo system, and not a true Home Theatre system. I have a wonderful Parasound A23 amp (THX Ultra 2 certified) paired with a set of Energy Audissey A2+2 mid tower, asymmetric bi-polar main speakers.

My point is, a stereo system, when properly setup, will provide a sound stage which is expansive, and natural. If one really paid any attention to where the sound actually comes from (on a 5.1 or greater sound mix), they will find that very little content is passed through to the back surround speakers. Majority of content is concentrated to the 3 front speakers (L,C,R). Since the center speaker is really used to help dialogue, the majority of sound content still comes from the L & R speakers.

If you cannot close your eyes, and feel the movie engulfing you through sound, what difference does it make to have a 5.1 or greater sound system?

[DaveOCP]

I've gotten bored with surround sound. Sure its neat to show your friends the Matrix bullet sequence a few times, or the House of Flying Daggers drum sequence, but that's it. 90% of the time, you're using just the center channel and all of your other speakers are going to total waste.

For music, surround sound is completely worthless. Dolby PLII Music sounds like complete garbage. I would MUCH rather listen to speakers that cost $10K/pr than five $2K speakers. Give me monoblocks, a stereo linestage preamp, and a pair of speakers.