Adding 2 more speakers to a 5.1 package(or other possible setups please) (1 Viewer)

[Ted Konkal]

New to the audio game but i want and respect quality sound.

I should be staying low budget but i want to make purchases that will allow me to upgrade to a mid end 7.2 home theatre system.

I just purchased a Yamaha RX-V673 7.2 I was going to purchase one of the following:

[*]JBL CS480B
[*]GMartinLogan MLT-2
[*]Energy Take Classic 5.1
[/list]
Then i got reading and was under the impression this wasnt the way to go having a decent reciever.

Is it a good idea to get a 5.1 then match up two other speakers in the future? WHat subwoofer is reccomended in the $100 range. Should my two others be of higher and and be my fronts?
Do I slowly buy higher end compnents to get the most out of my reciever?

I wont have room for towers which eventually i would love to have. Im in the miltary so room size is a little unpredictable but average size is 8 to 12 ft viewing distance. 14ft by 17ft room being the biggest and will vary by about 4ft.

Your advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Al.Anderson]

If your focus is on sound quality then you want stay away from satellite speakers. The key item is driver size (and buying a decent brand). Of the ones you listed, the Martin Logan's are the best bet, with a 4.5 driver.

After that, you're asking the right question, but it comes down to preference and funds, not right/wrong. If you're going to be running a center channel at all (for movies), then you will want the front 3 to be from the same manufacturer and product line. (The phrase is they should be "timbre matched", so that when the scene pans from side to side the sound stays the same.

So, you could get the MLs and then replace the front three when funds and a larger room dictate. (This wouldn't be huge loss, as you could move the L/R to the rear surrounds; making use of the 7.1 as opposed to the 5.1. You would be essentially losing your center.) Or, you could start with a 2.0, 3.0, 2.1, or 3.1 and add speakers later. If you get decent bookshelf speakers (5.5-6.5 driver), not having the sub wouldn't be as much of a killer as you'd think (for music, you'll want it for movies).

As for buying a separate sub, you won't get anything decent (new) for $100. You'll need to be in the $200-300 range, and really closer to the high end of that (again, assuming new). Here's an example of the smallest sub I'd get (for that size room, it wouldn't be very good it a much larger room):

http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/stf-1.html

You'll definitely get better reco's for subs, I'm not a sub guy.

I'll reiterate that you can really skip the sub for muic if you have some decent bookshelfs. I have Axiom M22s and I really don't need a sub at all.

By the way, I love the 673, so good choice there!

 

[schan1269]

The cheapest three subs worth buying...Dayton sub1000/1200BIC V1020.None of those are earth shattering performers. But, they don't suck either.

 

[Ted Konkal]

The cheapest three subs worth buying...Dayton sub1000/1200BIC V1020.None of those are earth shattering performers. But, they don't suck either.

Besides the obvious like Black
Frequency Response,Crossover Description,RMS Power Range, woofer size, and wattage what else is looked for in a good sub? FYI i agree with you the price compared to the specs looks like a great deal and thanks for the link.

 

[Type A]

Welcome to the forum

I would take the published specs with a grain of salt. For example the published low end on that Bic is better than the Hsu AI linked. However I wouldnt be surprised if the Hsu is still the superiour sub in low end performance despite the more conserative published response.

 

[Ted Konkal]

If your focus is on sound quality then you want stay away from satellite speakers. The key item is driver size (and buying a decent brand). Of the ones you listed, the Martin Logan's are the best bet, with a 4.5 driver.

After that, you're asking the right question, but it comes down to preference and funds, not right/wrong. If you're going to be running a center channel at all (for movies), then you will want the front 3 to be from the same manufacturer and product line. (The phrase is they should be "timbre matched", so that when the scene pans from side to side the sound stays the same.

So, you could get the MLs and then replace the front three when funds and a larger room dictate. (This wouldn't be huge loss, as you could move the L/R to the rear surrounds; making use of the 7.1 as opposed to the 5.1. You would be essentially losing your center.) Or, you could start with a 2.0, 3.0, 2.1, or 3.1 and add speakers later. If you get decent bookshelf speakers (5.5-6.5 driver), not having the sub wouldn't be as much of a killer as you'd think (for music, you'll want it for movies).

As for buying a separate sub, you won't get anything decent (new) for $100. You'll need to be in the $200-300 range, and really closer to the high end of that (again, assuming new). Here's an example of the smallest sub I'd get (for that size room, it wouldn't be very good it a much larger room):

http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/stf-1.html

You'll definitely get better reco's for subs, I'm not a sub guy.

I'll reiterate that you can really skip the sub for muic if you have some decent bookshelfs. I have Axiom M22s and I really don't need a sub at all.

By the way, I love the 673, so good choice there!

The shelves i have in my house are glass, im assuming this isnt a good surface for bookshelf speakers. Im looking to get the Martin Logan and upgrading as you mentioned, thats what i first had in mind. But i was leaning towards the Energy Takes due to the review on the Martin Logan subwoofer on the 5.1 package. What is your take on seperate speakers for surround and fronts; for example a set of fronts and a center with different surround speakers, what would i need to look at to match the surround to the fronts?

 

[Ted Konkal]

[*]What about the Pioneer SP-BS22-LR?
[/list]

 

[schan1269]

There is the Martin Logan set without the subwoofer.By the way. Hamstringing your wants, then complaining about what you can buy is called "bitching on both sides of the fence".Either go cheap and live with the result. Or buy piece by piece and get better stuff as you go.

 

[Al.Anderson]

Those Pioneers have gotten a lot of good press, so if you aren't happy with the reviews on the MLs, the Pioneers are a great option.

The front three should be from the same line; the surrounds really don't have to be. Of course, purists would want them all to be the same, but really not a big deal.

 

[Ted Konkal]

Hey thanks for everyones advice i have done lots of researching and deciding. Im going with the pioneer system then doing as A.L Anderson mentioned and upgrading the fronts and centers ni the future making the fronts surrounds and putting the center on my zone two in the garage or something.

 

[schan1269]

If you get the Pioneer, it is the same center regardless. And you can't use "one speaker" on a zone.

You can re-sell the Pioneer in the future. Popular enough now...there will be future demand.