I recently bought a house, which meant that I could finally get a surround sound system (already have a Toshiba Widescreen TV) with out my apartment neighbors wanting to kill me. So I go down to my local high end audio store and price out an "entry level" system. Came out to around $3- 4 K. Ouch! a bit more than I want to spend at once right after getting into my first house, but in the ball park for what I want to spend overall. Instead I go down to the local Best buy and buy a cheap Yamaha 5.1 receiver and a JBL system-in-a-box, the idea being that if I have a basic system in place and I can upgrade a piece at a time. Of course it wasn't long before I'm back down at the high-end store/crack house buying a B&W LCR60 to replace the tinny little center speaker. That made a big difference and of course it wasn't long before I was carting away a pair of 602s to replace the fronts. Now, finally, to my point. My original path was to eventually replace the 602s with some 604s and move the 602s to the rear and then replace the receiver with a Rotel receiver or even Rotel preamp/processor and separate power amp. But I'm wondering if that is not overkill. The speakers won't have to fill a huge room, and do I really need 602s for the rears? Why not just use 601s? And maybe a Denon receiver instead of the Rotel. So far my HT is just for DVDs. I have not tried DVD-A or the souped up CDs yet. IF I wanted to get a DVD-A capable player would that make a big difference for the speaker choice? The other factor in the decision is that I'd like to have a stereo upstairs (the HT is in the finished basement). If I don't blow all my money on the HT I could get some nice stuff for the other room. Would I regret not getting 604s for my HT? Would I be loosing out on sound quality with DVD-A with a 602/601 system compared to a 604/602 one?