|   Why is a "true Center" better? | LK
Jul 4, 2001 12:46 PM | | My current setup uses a smaller two-way speaker as a center. Turned on it's side, below the tv, on a short, upward tilting stand, it seems to match my L/R speakers perfectly, as they use the same tweeters and woofers. Dynamic range is 50hz to 20 khz. ( Older KEFs)
I seem to always be struggling with whether to set the center on LARGE, or Small? Sometimes it seems better to send the crash boom bang to the sub, to free up the dialogue, but then sometimes the voices sound so much better keeping it on large..etc..
There are times when I struggle to hear what the actors are saying, but then I get a movie that is crystal clear? Is it my speaker or the encoding of the soundtrack??? Would a "true" center eliminate this??
All I know is, the soundstage seems huge, and the sound very full, with this setup. I do have a digital equalizer for the center channel on my receiver so I can adjust slightly.
I SHOULD be satisfied with this arrangement, but you know how it is, you are always searching for that little bit extra..
I read about issues of horizontal dispersion..etc.. I didn't notice any difference with the speaker upright or horizontal. I know a true center will be shielded, which will be better for my finicky sony. I know a true center can be put on top of the tv.. not sure if this is better. I have a feeling a true center will give me better dialogue, but will this be at the expense of the effects/soundstage?
I guess my quandry is, I know having 3 full range speakers as L/R/C will give you "big sound" , but sometimes it feels clarity is sacrificed?
Theoretically, will a 700 dollar center sound better than a 700 dollar ( 1400 pr) Single speaker?
So either talk me into a center, or talk me into keeping my current setup.. ;) |
| re: Why is a "true Center" better? | manny
Jul 4, 2001 2:10 PM | | A "true center" will have frequency response that will better match what your needs are. In essence, like the way a sub is dedicated to bass response, a center is engineered for frequencies matching voices, etc. that are most common for center channel. Remember, your receiver designates signals for each channel. Hope this helps. |
| I disagree... | Quagmire
Jul 4, 2001 6:12 PM | | A "true center" merely has drivers that are arranged so as to make the speaker convenient to place on or near a video display and is video shielded for the same reason. The arrangement of the drivers usually represents a compromise in sound quality, typically uneven dispersion and limited low frequency capabilities, in favor of aesthetics and once again, placement around a video display.
A quality full range speaker will have a frequency response capable of producing the vocal range and much more; an important consideration since the center channel speaker is required to produce more than just dialogue. Additionally, if one is able to use the same speaker that is being used for the front left and right channels as a center channel speaker this will improve the timbre match for the front sound stage dramatically. Of course this is not always convenient, but where possible, I usually recommend this match of the front three speakers. For instance, sometimes three identical bookshelf speakers will achieve better performance that two bookshelf speakers and the "matched" center speaker.
As to the original poster's question regarding "large" or "small" setting of the center speaker, that would depend on the low frequecy capabilities of your center channel speaker and also how you have your front L/R speakers set. If the center channel speaker cannot produce bass heavy material without distortion, then of course run it as "small". You may want to consider setting your front L/R speakers to small even though they are capable of low frequency response to gain a better timbrel match with the center speaker. It should be obvious to you by now that speaker settings and placement are not an exact science. You should experiment with speaker setting until you achieve the best match of the speakers without overdriving them on the low end. Best of luck.
Q |
| Excellent, excellent!!!!!! | Terrence
Jul 4, 2001 8:37 PM | | I couldn't have said it better myself. You make me proud.(awe damn it now I'm blubbering ;-)
Terrence |
| Excellent, excellent!!!!!! | mtrycrafts
Jul 4, 2001 9:37 PM | | An excellent, excellent and a bingo:-) We are getting someplace:-) |
| Thanks guys... | Quagmire
Jul 5, 2001 12:08 AM | | I appreciate the vote of confidence. Now, let me try one of these happy face thingies. Never done one before. #(<
No no, that's not it. ,?)
Damn it, I didn't think it would be this hard to do! ;&^
Sonofabitch!!!
<sqints his left eye shut, tongue extended and drawn to the right, face horribly contorted, flailing away at his keyboad.>
&%$@(*^%^$$@!":?>>> SH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!T
<Tune in tommorrow folks. This may take awhile.>
!@#$%^&*(*&_)(*&&^%$$##@$%^&*(><>... |
| Funny.....Funny...Goo Advice...(nt) | Adam
Jul 5, 2001 8:30 AM | | |
| I disagree...I think one can get by without a centre! | Satz
Jul 5, 2001 4:31 PM | | True. as a previous poster said due to aesthetic reasons of keeping a specialist centre speaker small and light, it's never going to sound the same as the mains.
MIssion speakers themselves recommended me finding a third speaker identical to my left and right so that they all matched well.
Of course, being tower speakers its pretty hard to have a third one in my room so I'm running without any centre. That way I don't get timbre mismatch and yet seem to get all the dialog!
The old story about enjoying sounds 'panning' across the 3 speakers is only true if you have a really wide room. My setup is essentially my stereo setup in which the old truism was that you never had the speakers so far apart that there was a 'hole' in the soundstage....
My A$0.02 worth (about US$0.01 cents!!!) |
| I disagree...I think one can get by without a centre! | Quagmire
Jul 5, 2001 5:40 PM | | I don't disagree that one can "get by" without a center channel speaker, I just wouldn't suggest that this is the optimal way to listen to 5.1 material. There are certain anomalies which plagued the old 2-channel stereo format that will be reintroduced into a surround sound system when omitting the center channel speaker. Many of the advancements which have been achieved through these new discrete multi-channel formats will be negated by rerouting discrete information intended for a single center channel speaker to the front left and right speakers instead.
I have commented on this numerous times before, as has Terrence, but since he is much more capable of explaining the technical aspects of what occurs, I will step aside and let him explain this if he is so inclined. However, I will say this... much is made of timbrel matching between speakers, which is an important consideration that was at the heart of the original post. What is less understood but no less important is how the presentation of discrete, mono information being produced through two speakers degrades the original timbre of the source material.
I do believe that omitting the center channel speaker is preferred to using a poor quality one, or one which is badly mismatched with the front speakers. However, if this is YOUR preferred way to listen to YOUR system, well then... to thine own self be true.
Q |
| I disagree...I think one can get by without a centre! | mtrycrafts
Jul 5, 2001 10:45 PM | | A need for three front speakers were known in the early 30s and we are still making excuses for two. Some just cannot let go of it:-) |
| Good point... | Quagmire
Jul 6, 2001 12:10 AM | | Also, I am curious as to why people think it is an improvement to take discrete information, intended for a particular speaker, and make it non-discrete. I mean as you pointed out, the need to have a "center" speaker was something which was known, but was simply impractical because of the technical limitations of the times. I don't understand why some people think using older techniques to implement newer technologies is better? The ability to provide truly discrete information to individual speakers is something which set DD and DTS apart from earlier formats; not just to the center speaker but to the surrounds as well. The improved "clean" sound of DD and DTS is one reason many bought into DVD in the first place. So why go and clutter it up again? I dunno. I suspect, as you suggested, that many are just comfortable with how the older formats sound and don't want to give them up.
Q |
| The problems you cannot hear, but its there...... | Terrence
Jul 5, 2001 5:43 PM | | "being tower speakers its pretty hard to have a third one in my room so I'm running without any centre. That way I don't get timbre mismatch and yet seem to get all the dialog!"
Yes you are!! But yours is even worse. If you are using two speakers with dialog dispersed by both speakers, you are getting comb filtering, and other head related transfer distortions. This is worse than having a mis-matched center in my opinion. Dialog emanating from the left speaker will have to travel around the head to reach the right ear, and visa versa for the dialog from the right speaker to the left ear. This is called inter-aural time difference. While this is less critical in lower frequencies where wavelengths are very long, but in the mid and upper frequencies(2-4khz) where the hearing is most sensitive, and it is more audible artifact. Most common artifact is timbre alterations in the dialog. In the presence of strong left/Right information, what is in the middle, will become muddy and vague. Intelligibility becomes an issue.
If you use too close of a speaker positioning of your L/R pair to sort of "fill in" the hole, it is likely you are mono-izing some stereo components of the soundtrack, because you have varied spatial character of the dispersed sound. Even if you did put the speakers closer together, you still cannot avoid the inter-aural shadowing that occurs around the ears.
You may be getting all of the dialog, but its timbre, and frequency response has been altered. If it is not dealt with with Eq during post, then it will sound much different than it would if a center speaker was present. Your getting it all, but it won't sound accurate.
Terrence |
| An example... | Quagmire
Jul 5, 2001 9:00 PM | | "In the presence of strong left/Right information, what is in the middle, will become muddy and vague. Intelligibility becomes an issue."
One example of this that I believe is very audible and that I have recommended to people who have doubts is the scene from "Godzilla" where the trawlers are pulled under. I first experimented with this by listening to the scene with the center speaker on, then with it turned off. To me, with the center speaker off, once the action began the dialogue got trampled on. Also the front sound stage actually shrank and became less stable: Just the opposite of what most who promote a centerless setup believe.
The sound was much more cohessive, directional cues better, and intelligibility markedly improved with the center speaker cut in. For those wanting a first hand demonstration of what you're talking about, I think this scene offers a good example. Of course, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, you may disagree entirely. Also, because everone's setup is different, results may range from no difference at all, to actually preferring the centerless setup. I just thought that for those who may have been curious about this issue, this scene may prove interesting. If you have any scenes that you can recommend, I'm sure others will be happy to hear of them.
Q |
| LK | Quagmire
Jul 5, 2001 9:35 PM | | "...it seems to match my L/R speakers perfectly, as they use the same tweeters and woofers."
This is really what you're looking for. If you already have this in a bookself speaker, I wouldn't spend the money on a "matched" center channel speaker. I mean after all, how can it be any better matched than the speaker you have just described: Especially if you notice no difference with the speaker tilted on it's side. That's essentially all a center channel speaker is, with video shielding.
The only thing more I would recommend, is that you play around with placement of the speaker in an upright position (drivers vertically aligned). If the speaker is video shielded, you may find that with better placement, you do hear an improvement in the front sound stage. Remember, you're not just looking for ways to make this isolated speaker sound better, ideally the goal is to have all three front speakers create a large, seamless presentation of everything happening in that direction. If you achieve this, you will have improved on the sound you are likely to get from the purchase of the center channel speaker in question; certainly no worse IMO.
As to the setting of either "large" or "small", I still stand by the advice offered in my previous posts. Hope this helps. I didn't mean to lose sight of your specific questions while engaging in the other discussions brought up by your thread. Best of luck.
Q |
| OK.. i might as well ask it.. what about TWO centers? | LK
Jul 6, 2001 12:42 AM | | Seriously, the side discussions help me understand the complexity of analysis, so I don't mind at all.
First of all thanks for the advice, I will play around with the center vertical position again, just to satisfy myself. However the 'sideways" arrangement seems optimal, because there is a coffee table between me and the tv.
Here is my layout:
Distance from TV to ears, 9 feet. Coffee table in the center.
The 36" tv, is on an 16" stand, and the tops of my L/R speakers are 6 " below the top of the tv (tweeters just at ear level sitting down).
My bookshelf center is placed on the side, tilted upwards by a short 9" stand. The sound just clears the coffee table, and the book shelf is doesn't block the the screen. It sits about...9" in front of the tv, which seems to solve the shielding problem. . If I put the speaker vertically, I can't use a stand, because it will block the tv, so I have to put the speaker on the floor, in which case i think the coffee table blocks the sound.
So i think i'm stuck with the bookshelf on the side?
OK... now for my question.
My yamaha receiver allows me to have TWO center channel speakers. Don't ask me if it is mono/stereo ( it must be mono? ) , but I've yet to try it because I can just IMAGINE what the wife will think about it... " YOU WANT TO WHAAAaaT???"
Any possible advantage for this, other than if you have a huge room, or HUGE tv /image? |
| Well sir... | Quagmire
Jul 6, 2001 1:35 AM | | "...the sideways arrangement seem optimal, because there is a coffee table between me and the tv."
You may indeed have the best setup possible for your particular setting, and the WAF. It's all about compromises, so be thankful that you are basically happy with how things sound rather than cursing the fact that thing would sound better "if only..."
Don't feel like you have to play around with the speaker if it's completely impractical. I only suggested this because generally, getting the alignment of the drivers in a vertical patern creates an axis for even horizontal dispersion of sound from the speaker. Your current arrangment is no worse than many center channel speakers. If you can't place the speaker on top of the set in an upright position, then I would leave it alone. Don't put it on the floor.
If you are thinking about using two bookself speakers on either side of the set, I would not advise doing that. I think Yamaha provided the dual mono outputs so that people who had big screens sets could use the tv's speakers as the center channel speaker (just speculation on my part). As I said, Terrence is the real expert on this, but generally, when you use two center channel speakers you create the same types of problems as you do when using no center channel speaker and routing the mono information intended for the center speaker to the two front mains instead. Maybe we can coax him to elaborate on this.
You seem itching to do something different, so maybe you can talk the wife into just rearranging things a bit so you can experiment with various setups. Don't do anything to upset that delicate ballance we all have to maintain though, it just isn't worth it my friend. Good luck.
Q |
| Thanks for all replies.. most helpful (nt) | LK
Jul 7, 2001 2:56 PM | | |
| |
