In an HT system, you don't HAVE to use a center channel *or* a subwoofer (1 Viewer)

[LanceJ]

THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT (and thank you Philip ).

And I'm outta here.

 

[John S]

Well, it is a hard sell on a Home Theater board for sure. I said I was willing to give it a shot at some point though.. I'm always game for experiementation.

 

[BillyHC]

I think that sums it up pretty well.

As I was/am on a budget, my upgrade path was/is:
large mains (to handle bass info until I get a sub)
then
surrounds
then
sub and/or center
then
sub and/or center (whichever is left)

rinse, lather, repeat.

At each point on the path, I am still getting a very enjoyable HT experience.
As I move down the path, that HT experience improves.

But, if you start with small mains, then you're probably better off doing:
small mains + small sub
then
surrounds
then
better sub or center
then
better sub or center (whichever is left)

rinse, lather, repeat.

 

[Edward J M]

I agree 100% - I've been doing it for years in my upstairs rig, and only recently added a subwoofer, so I'm still running a phantom center channel and it works just fine. The speaker management in DD/DTS receivers provides a lot of flexibility for people who can't accomodate the the center channel (or w/e), and yet still want 5.1 sound.

 

[trey-m]

Perhaps the center channel issue can be restated as:

Which sounds better: Two speakers playing a mono signal, or one?

I'm thinking that they would be indistinguishable if you are sitting in the sweet spot. (After volume adjusting for the fact that there's only one speaker rather than two.)

 

[LanceJ]

A bump for the financially-challenged among us, or if they are fans of HGTV's decorating shows.

 

[MikeNg]

If your mains are putting out usable signals down to 30Hz, you've probably spent a pretty chunk of change on them, and could have bought a center channel and sub! IMO, there's no reason to have a true full range speaker for L/R unless you do serious 2-channel listening and want to keep the experience 'pure'. In any case, having a center channel is great for HT if you get one that sonically matches your mains - don't just get any one, even if it's a nice one. NOT having a center channel (IMO) will lessen the HT experience because it may not be the way the sound for the movie was engineered (they recorded the track with a center channel in mind). If the movie has a 2.0 track then I think the imaging will be pretty good (however fewer movies come with a 2.0 track nowadays). Imaging suffers when you are playing a 5.1 track with 'phantom center' mode on, and the AVR has to mess with what was the center channel signal and make that a part of L/R. This has been my experience. I've run my HT centerless for a few years, and recently got a center.

I can't imagine running my system without my subs. It makes me sad.

 

[Victor Ferguson]

I couldnt live without a sub. However, I live in my own house. If I still lived in a townhouse or rented an apartment I don't see a sub being of much use. I do however believe that you can't skip the center with dd and dts sources. It is possible to run without a center but I prefer having it. I also listen to alot of music and always listen to it in 2 channel because that is how it was mixed and tends to sound better. I think that applies to dd and dts tracks. They just sound better played back the way they were intended through a 5.1 or 6.1/7.1 setup. I'm not trying to rebut what the origional poster stated and I am simply stating my opionion.

 

[John S]

You know I still never tried my system or anybody elses without a center speaker. I have to do that someday, I can just tell the AVR it is not there right? Seems easy enough to try.

 

[Phil Iturralde]

Lewis Besze was referring to the following "White Paper" document ...

Loudspeakers and Rooms for Multichannel Audio Reproduction

by Floyd E. Toole Vice President Acoustical Engineering Harman International

Part 1 – How many loudspeakers? What kind? Where do we put them? Here we look at the basic theory of multichannel audio systems, leading us to understand why certain loudspeaker designs and room arrangements work better than others.

Click the above link to read the entire on-line White Paper.

Have fun reading, (15 pages PDF format)
Phil

 

[Rob*W]

I've actually checked this out on my system. Some older movies have simple mono sound. With these movies and my system configured for all speakers, the sound emits only from the center speaker; if I switch my system to stereo, then the sound emits from the two mains. Unequivocally, the sound is better in the stereo mode, i.e. two speakers playing a mono signal.

I haven't investigated how big the sweet spot is in this case. And I've been too lazy to see how a 5.1 signal sounds with a phantom center, but I've always suspected it would sound a bit better, based on how the mono movie sounds.

 

[AlanZ]

I've been a phantom guy for over two years now....wouldn't even consider going back to a center.

 

[Thomas_A]

I run Phantom mode in my bedroom HT. I really have no place for a center channel...and the one I'd want to use is not a small speaker. I'm quite happy with it and other then visually "not" seeing a center... cant tell there isnt one. In my My theater room- of course I have a center- but too say you have to have one...I dont agree with. I think the Author hit the nail on the head with this article.

I cant live without subs though!

 

[rob-h]

I tried phantom in 1998........ I did not like it then, and I dont like it now. There is definitely a diffrence. With a center you lose track of where the speakers are. The sound seems to come from the screen. Thats the biggest diffrence to me.

 

[AlanZ]

I don't mean this to be an inflammatory post, but a lot of the time it depends on the quality of your mains. When I had Paraidgm Atoms, I preferred the center channel. That's not to say that those speakers were bad, cause I loved the hell out of them. It wasn't until I went to the studio line that I found out the advantage of going phantom. Those speakers imaged well enough and had a large enough soundstage that I didn't miss my studio/cc at all. I have Maggies now, and I think the phantom center may be more popular with Maggie owners than just about any other brand of speaker. The irony there is that Magnepan's center, the CC3, is widely considered one of the best centers on the market.

It all comes down to individual taste in the end, though.

 

[Philip Hamm]

No more so than the quality of your center. I use all three itentical speakers in the front and it sounds great! However, phantom is fine, too if you can not or will not run a center at all.

 

[Gralen]

Wow I lived almost year without a sub and lived 1 month without a center channel. There was a big difference. The sub added impact and the center channel seems more clearer.And for people who live in apartments, it can be done to have a sub since I live in one. Only problem you cant really crank it but my velodyne does do well for impact.

 

[Jack Gilvey]

A dedicated center is meant to anchor the center channel for those viewers/listeners outside of the "sweet spot". If that's not a concern, then a phantom center can work well. Ideally, one would use a full-range speaker for a center, identical to the L/R. This is not possible in most cases short of a FP setup.
A sub is not really optional is one wants to deliver what's on a soundtrack in dynamics and FR. On an absolute basis, though, it's optional...as is all the other equipment.

 

[JoeyR]

They can have my SVS when they pry it from my cold, dead hands

 

[Philip Hamm]

What if something better comes along. How cold and dead will your hands be then?