If you Had a $600-700 budget how would you start off your Home Theater?

[twistedcrankcammer]

Then add surrounds and then a center channel last.

If you are going for HT, adding a good center channel last would not be my choice. I would buy the fronts, then center, then sub, then surrounds. What good is it if you have good bass and awesome surround if you can't hear the dialog from the center channel or if they are being matrixed in with your front two speakers. Just my opinion

Sounds like we are on the same page. []

Roger

[twistedcrankcammer]

It is called a phantom center.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to when I said matrixed with the mains. Again, this is a personal preference. I would rather have a nice dedicated center channel and no surrounds than surrounds and a phantom center.

As you said, it is a personal preference. But, I would rather have surrounds than a center channel. This is HT after all. Properly calibrated I bet you could not tell me if my center channel was on or not. But I bet you would know if the surrounds were on or not!

He has a very tight budget. You can fake center channel, but you can't fake surrounds.

Dennie

Dennie,

I suspected, and your profile backs this up, that if you believe that, you don't have enough center channel to match your mains in the first place.

I orriginally set up my parents system with 4 KS-10.5 towers a RC-3II and a Velodyne HGS 10 in clear acrylic dealer model. The RC-3II was not enough center for the 10.5s, so I bought an RC-7. The RC-7 mates perfectly with the 10.5s. Later, when I got the RF-7s, the RC-7 was no longer enough, and I bought a RF-7 that had been modified into a center channel. Current surround sound packages are a comprimise in desighn. Most don't have room for a center that large, but it never made sence to me to dial back your mains and boost the center and surrounds so you can hear crap. Why even bother with nice mains in such an instance? If you natch all three across the front, and your surrounds with the same efficiency, you will not only apreciate that center channel alot more, but you can go multi channel stereo whith your rear surrounds matching your fronts if you want to jam or be enveloped in the sound. This is exactly the reason I searched so hard to put together 7 complete TSCM speakers. Most of your information comes from that center, and if it matched perfectly, you sure could hear a differance from fantom center. The rear surrounds do not carry that much info, and most "KIT" home theatres including Klipsch, are so far behind in sensitivity on the surround that you have to again, jack arround with the system and dial back the mains. If the orriginal poster buys the 10.5s, it wont take long to come up with another $200 for matching rear towers. You need to experience a system with all matching speakers just like Indy Rogers slit La Scala settup, which would give you a direct understanding of what you are missing with the pair of La Scalas in your current settup. What is the sensitivity of your center and surrounds? It has to be off big time. Not putting down what you have, but you need to listen to Rogers and reassess thew importance of that center channel, and with a slit La Scala, your center channel placement shouldn't be that hard. [Y]

Roger

[psg]

It is called a phantom center.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to when I said matrixed with the mains. Again, this is a personal preference. I would rather have a nice dedicated center channel and no surrounds than surrounds and a phantom center.

As you said, it is a personal preference. But, I would rather have surrounds than a center channel. This is HT after all. Properly calibrated I bet you could not tell me if my center channel was on or not. But I bet you would know if the surrounds were on or not!

He has a very tight budget. You can fake center channel, but you can't fake surrounds.

Dennie

Dennie,

I suspected, and your profile backs this up, that if you believe that, you don't have enough center channel to match your mains in the first place.

I orriginally set up my parents system with 4 KS-10.5 towers a RC-3II and a Velodyne HGS 10 in clear acrylic dealer model. The RC-3II was not enough center for the 10.5s, so I bought an RC-7. The RC-7 mates perfectly with the 10.5s. Later, when I got the RF-7s, the RC-7 was no longer enough, and I bought a RF-7 that had been modified into a center channel. Current surround sound packages are a comprimise in desighn. Most don't have room for a center that large, but it never made sence to me to dial back your mains and boost the center and surrounds so you can hear crap. Why even bother with nice mains in such an instance? If you natch all three across the front, and your surrounds with the same efficiency, you will not only apreciate that center channel alot more, but you can go multi channel stereo whith your rear surrounds matching your fronts if you want to jam or be enveloped in the sound.

I was with you until then Roger!

Good stereo imaging when the speakers disappear from the room is so much better than multi-channel stereo!

But I agree that phantom center is better than a center speaker that is NOT up to the standards of the mains, and a good center rocks in HT.

[twistedcrankcammer]

It is called a phantom center.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to when I said matrixed with the mains. Again, this is a personal preference. I would rather have a nice dedicated center channel and no surrounds than surrounds and a phantom center.

As you said, it is a personal preference. But, I would rather have surrounds than a center channel. This is HT after all. Properly calibrated I bet you could not tell me if my center channel was on or not. But I bet you would know if the surrounds were on or not!

He has a very tight budget. You can fake center channel, but you can't fake surrounds.

Dennie

Dennie,

I suspected, and your profile backs this up, that if you believe that, you don't have enough center channel to match your mains in the first place.

I orriginally set up my parents system with 4 KS-10.5 towers a RC-3II and a Velodyne HGS 10 in clear acrylic dealer model. The RC-3II was not enough center for the 10.5s, so I bought an RC-7. The RC-7 mates perfectly with the 10.5s. Later, when I got the RF-7s, the RC-7 was no longer enough, and I bought a RF-7 that had been modified into a center channel. Current surround sound packages are a comprimise in desighn. Most don't have room for a center that large, but it never made sence to me to dial back your mains and boost the center and surrounds so you can hear crap. Why even bother with nice mains in such an instance? If you natch all three across the front, and your surrounds with the same efficiency, you will not only apreciate that center channel alot more, but you can go multi channel stereo whith your rear surrounds matching your fronts if you want to jam or be enveloped in the sound.

I was with you until then Roger!

Good stereo imaging when the speakers disappear from the room is so much better than multi-channel stereo!

But I agree that phantom center is better than a center speaker that is NOT up to the standards of the mains, and a good center rocks in HT.

Peter,

Depends on the mood I am in. For critical listening I agree that 2 channel is better. If I want to hammer the sytem and Jam, really rock, I like to have it on multi channel stereo. You still get some left right seperation, but you aren't critically listening anyhow at those SPLs. and 50% of the time, I'm not even sitting when I have it cranked either, so I enjoy it more as I move arround when I am doing something/working on somethng.

Roger

[psg]

Gotha.

[SuBXeRo]

I started off with rf-10's and then upgraded to RF-3 II's. I would much rather have a 3.0 then a 2.1 for home theater. The RF-3 II's have large enough cones to more then adequately reproduce the lows in most instances. They in no way can reproduce what a dedicated subwoofer does but witht h RF-10's you may feel the bottom end was lacking as i did. I am in a situation where i cannot have a subwoofer (i'm in an apt) so i needed something else to curb the bass craving which is the RF-3 II's. Not to mention i got the RF-3 II's for 250 on craigslist and they are in fantastic condition. I haver an RC-10 which i could see you being happy with, i am looking to upgrade the rc-10 to something larger but vs not having a cneter, the rc-10 is more than adequate. Craigslist has great deals, not all areas though are as active as the area i am in.

[o0O Bill O0o]

Start with the Fundamentals

2 Bookshelf Speakers, a Good Receiver (multi channel in, pre outs) Good Display (1080p) and a Playstation 3.

Then at a later time add a Subwoofer

Then at a later time add 3 More Bookshelf speakers, one for center (Matches across the front), the pair for the surround

Beyond that, more surrounds if your receiver is a 7.1 and another subwoofer.

Klipsch sells products that meet these requirements but you don't have to get their stuff.

[ZASKARK]

Hey everyone I just purchased my home theater system on Amazon.com I will keep everyone posted on how they are.

[RockOn4Klipsch]

Looks like I'm a little late.

I would have suggested the same as others, be patient. I know it's difficult, we bought our house when we were 19 and all klipsch speakers have since replaced a samsung HTIB.

I wasn't as patient as I am now and started with a pair of RF 5's, RC 35 and RS35's, I've since replaced them with all 7 series speakers all on the used market, however, i've spent more on aquiring the things I wanted then if I had just been patient I bought 2 sets of speakers each time for 1 set of speakers.

Have fun, and I feel sorry for you if you're anything like some of us younger guys here. This is a horrible addiction to have at such a young age.

[RockOn4Klipsch]

I didn't even answer the question, if I had 700 dollars, I would wait until I saw a pair of RF 5's RF 7's La Scala's or cornwalls come up (i've seen all those speakers in that price range), I would travel a little ways to pick them up if I needed.

I would wait a few weeks for another pay check and buy a 100 dollar reciever from CL to listen to until I could purchase the matching center channel. I would then save up some more money to replace the reciever, then next I would purchase a sub, then I'd eventually get around to buying some surrounds.

[Ironsave]

I didn't even answer the question, if I had 700 dollars, I would wait until I saw a pair of RF 5's RF 7's La Scala's or cornwalls come up (i've seen all those speakers in that price range), I would travel a little ways to pick them up if I needed.

I would wait a few weeks for another pay check and buy a 100 dollar reciever from CL to listen to until I could purchase the matching center channel. I would then save up some more money to replace the reciever, then next I would purchase a sub, then I'd eventually get around to buying some surrounds.

He is 17; CL is not really an option...... He will learn; and at least he has our Forum as a good resource.

[Thaddeus Smith]

there's two pair of 5's that popped up in dallas just today for $600 and $750. Go figure..

[toddvj]

I'm a little late to this party, but thought I'd chime in on the center/surrounds debate.

The center channel is way more important than the surround channels. I don't even know that I'd classify that as an opinion, it's pretty much a fact.

[RockOn4Klipsch]

He is 17; CL is not really an option

What does this mean?

He never said he still lived at home, so him being 17 mean nothing.

I lived by myself and had a fulltime job at 17.

[Ironsave]

He is 17; CL is not really an option

What does this mean?

He never said he still lived at home, so him being 17 mean nothing.

I lived by myself and had a fulltime job at 17.

He has stated that his parents would not allow him to goto someones house via craigslist to buy audio gear; etc.

My response was to get his dad involved; etc.

The reality is not everyone is as mature at 17 as we were.....

[Thaddeus Smith]

not unreasonable at all. however, i've yet to find someone who wasn't willing to meet me at a starbucks in the middle - regardless of the item size.

[runninshine]

He is 17; CL is not really an option

What does this mean?

He never said he still lived at home, so him being 17 mean nothing.

I lived by myself and had a fulltime job at 17.

Things are very different now. Kids live with their parents until they are 25 and don't have jobs.

[Ironsave]

http://chicago.craigslist.org/nwc/ele/1885731628.html

This is the kind of posting I was hoping he could find (by being patient).....

[runninshine]

I saw vertical Cornwalls in Naples FL. $450 (in garage sale thread)

[RockOn4Klipsch]

I must have missed the responseabout his parents. My apologies.

http://chicago.craigslist.org/nwc/ele/1885731628.html

This is the kind of posting I was hoping he could find (by being patient).....

That's exactly what he should look for. but then again if he lives at home how big of speakers will his parents let him bring home.