I want to buy one OR two S6 surrounds

[Wild Blue]

All-

Looking to complete a system here, and I need one more KSP-S6 surround speaker for my new rear center channel in 6.1. Used is okay, just needs to operate with no performance degradation. Prefer black, might be able to do white.

Perhaps someone is looking to sell one S6 surround from a pair where one was damaged? If not, I could maybe do a pair.

BRAND NEW Yamaha RX-Z1 Receiver

(replaces Yamaha RX-V2095 receiver, anyone want to buy?)

KLF-30 Mains

KLF-C7 Center

KSW-15 Subwoofer

KSP-S6 surrounds

3.1 front effect speakers

You can E-mail a private reply also to CJDotur@msn.com

[avman]

why a s-6?? what is the current placement of your rear surrounds now? wouldn't a direct-radiator be better as center rear? i wouldn't consider a s-6 for center front,so why is it o.k. for ctr. rear? comments y'all??

avman.

------------------

1-pair klf 30's

c-7 center (looking for 1-m.o.klf-20)

ksps-6 surrounds

RSW-15

sony strda-777ES receiver upgraded to v.2.02 including virtual matrix 6.1

sony playstation 2

sony dvpnc 650-v 5-disc dvd/cd/SACD changer

dishnetwork model 6000 HD sat rcvr w/digital off-air tuner

sony kv36xbr450 high-definition 4:3 tv

sharp xv-z1u lcd projector w/84" 4:3 sharp screen

Bello'international Italian-made a/v furniture

panamax max dbs+5 surge protector/power conditioner

monster cable and nxg interconnects/12 gua.speaker wire

Natuzzi red leather furniture set

KLIPSCH-So Good It Hz!

[Wild Blue]

Avman-

I thought about this. I decided to go with the S-6 for the primary reason of matching the sound to my rear surrounds. I don't think the rear center is going to be doing all THAT much work like a front center would, where it focuses on 90% of the dialogue. I see the function of the rear center to be COMPLETELY different than the front center.

Already the S6's don't 100% match the fronts, but they're pretty much the best you can get to matching the KLF-30's. I don't want a sound that hangs out in the rear of my theater moving from left to right to change sound as it transitions through the rear center and then back again as it goes to the opposite side. So I'd like to keep it matched as much as possible.

HOWEVER, I'm very open to other people's ideas and opinions. Anyone else?

[boa12]

wb, i feel a rear center is actually more similar to the front than different in that for matrixed rear surround material (which is all but dts es discrete), the rear center acts as an anchor to the discrete surround channels w/ 5.1.

and as for something w/ a discrete rear center channel like dts es discrete, i think a direct rad speak is much preferred.

this again was most apparent when i just watched "hart's war" that had some excellent effects of planes flying overhead. but instead of going from front center to rear center as the planes did, the sound went from front center to all over in the rear. dts es 6.1 discrete would have rectified this w/ the use of a direct rear center speaker/channel. much more localization precision w/ a direct in this spot.

have you looked for &/or considered a C6 for this spot?

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[Wild Blue]

Hmmm... no, haven't considered the C6. Wouldn't I want to use a C7 like I use in the front center if I chose to go that route?

For me, it seems to boil down to the S6 surround or a C7 center for the rear center channel given my other components. Thoughts? Anyone have one for sale?

[boa12]

wb, that's a dilemma for sure cause you have to balance the timbre matching w/ the front vs the timbre matching

w/ the surround (s6). but the c7 would i think be fine too since it seems the c7 matches well w/ your front array. the ole if a matches b & if b matches c, then a matches c logic.

i think av is or is considering using a c7 between the s6. no direct experience w/ the s6 here though. good luck.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[T2K]

The difference in the sound of the C-6 and the C-7 is quite large. Those of you that own Legends know that they'll reach out and slap ya. Same for the C-7. The Synergy's have more of a refined/smooth sound (descriptive use-not saying one is better/worse than the other). I would definitely go with the C-6. Side-to-side pans in the rear probably wouldn't be close using a C-7.

Check both speakers specs(driver's)in 'Classics'. Remember, they were made for each other. Good luck!

Keith

[boa12]

yes as keith says i'd definitely lean toward a c6 (sorry for the illogical formula). the s6 have been said to be like a "good" or sufficient match as surrounds for legends.

but that's as surrounds. because of the room & positioning, you'll get some different timbre between frony array & surrounds just from that alone. even w/ the exact same speaks. iow, room & positioning in that also affects timbre, not just the speaker/driver characteristics. this i have heard myself in my own room, though w/ reference speaks.

& so far anyway, 6.1 matrix material dominates. so rear side-side sweeps/matching is more important than front-back sweeps/matching.

so i'd definitely lean toward the C6 or ksp towers for rear surround. S6 only if you have a huge space to fill between the surrounds.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[avman]

oops! double post

This message has been edited by avman on 07-16-2002 at 12:00 PM

[avman]

good replies guys,WHEN i get a klf-20 m.o. horizontalised for ctr front use, i'll probably move my c-7 to the rear ctr position(hey, i'll already have it)the c-6 would be a better timbre match(going to look at the specs).avman.

[Wild Blue]

Yeah, I understand everything you guys are saying. But it's just not jiving with my brain 100%. Part of me thinks if I have a C-7 up front for my center, why would I put a C-6 in the rear center? That's just starting with a bad match. And the argument about using highly localized sound in the rear center seems weird, like I'll have the diffused sound on the rear sides, but then hear discreet sound from one distinct location directly behind my head.

The front center seems HIGHLY localized since it's right there by/behind the screen where the actual dialogue is coming from. The idea of the surround sound both sides and rear seems to be to wrap the sound AROUND you, not point it directly at you from one specific location behind you.

I'm not arguing, I'm trying to understand everything and have it make sense to me.

[boa12]

"like I'll have the diffused sound on

the rear sides, but then hear discreet sound from one distinct location directly behind

my head."

wb, the idea is you have diffuse sound already coming out from near the rear center of the room (unless you have a really wide rear wall). a direct there then would tie together that diffuse sound coming from 2 different channels near it sides. or you could say it anchors the sound since the rear center channel is a matrix (not discrete) of the 2 discrete surround channels.

in this regard you'd be better off w/ a C6 which is a better timbre match to the s6 surrounds.

& the reason the the front center seems more localized is that w/ 5.1 about 75% or more of the total sound comes from the front center (mostly dialogue). this is not the same case as with the surround info which is pretty even when its ever used.

that & the visual along w/ the center channel probably makes it seem more localized because your brain processes it so. adding visual to audio has a powerful combo. that's what made mtv so big. the video made the music sound better.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

This message has been edited by boa12 on 07-17-2002 at 07:34 PM

[Wild Blue]

(blank look of bewilderment coming over my face)

Hmmm... sorry, more confused than ever. In 6.1, the rear center IS a discreet channel, not matrixed like it would be SIMULATING a separate rear center from a 5.1 soundtrack with a separate Pro Logic Receiver, right? I read the posts you were making on the other discussion about rear centers. Is your point that most music and movie soundtrack formats are 5.1 at BEST, and 6.1 is overall rare therefore making most rear center sounds matrixed? And if that's the case, are you saying that the rear center sound is already diffused and simulated with no rear center speaker, and adding a WDST speaker for a rear center speaker on the matrixed formats adds virtually no additional benefits? If so, I think I see at least where you're coming from.

Yet even so, I'm still not understanding the principle of "anchoring the rear surround sound" with the rear center if the surround speakers are supposed to give an ENVELOPING sound AROUND the listener, not just at one specific location behind the person.

I haven't ever actually listened to 6.1 surround with all separate speakers. Are you saying with your last point that because the speaker is behind you and you don't SEE it, that you don't hear it from just that one location, and your brain tells you it is coming from all locations behind you?

[boa12]

wb, 6.1 is usually, these days so far at least, in the form of Dolby Digital EX or dts es 6.1 matrix, which means the rear surround channel is matrixed. the 1st

dvd in dts es 6.1 discrete was "the haunting" & dvd in this are still rather rare. this is the rear surround channel being discrete.

might want to check out the tech pages at www.dolby.com & www.dtsonline.com

the rear speaker in matrix format was meant to fill in the surround hole that might exist between the surrounds. if this hole is rather narrow a direct should be best. if its a pretty wide hole, possibly a diffuse or wdst type speak like the s6 may work better.

there's no absolutes here 'cause it depends on your individual situation & tastes. ideally you'd want to test each type or various speaks to hear which sounds best to you in the surround function based on what you listen to most.

also keep in mind there are really 2 types of surround sound. localized (like w/ 6.1 discrete when a plane flies right over your head to rear center), & non-localized where the sound sweeps, pans, or scatters

in all directions. of course direct speaks get the nod in the former & wdst/dipole type get the nod for the latter.

so you can see why which to use is a controversial subject to say the least. some say its still best to use a wdst type speak as rear center(s), especially since wdst type have a direct cone & 180 degree tweets.

only way to really tell for you is demo.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[Lovebohn]

I have a pair of S6's for sale please email me and we can talk.

Dave

dbohn@wctc.net

------------------

KSP 400

KSP C6

KSP S6

KSP C6 Rear Center

M&K V-75 Sub

Denon 3802

JVC 701 DVD

Mits WS-55819 HDTV RPTV

[Steve Phillips]

I agree with boa12's last post.

I bought the Haunting dts ES after selling the DD EX version. The ES discret version was more realistic to me and my wife.

I have KSP-S6 side surrounds and when I went to 6.1 I tried first one IW-150, which is a direct radiating speaker. Wasn't enough, so I added one more. I had the chance to get 2 KSP-S6's. I mounted them in the same location as the in-walls, same hight as the side surrounds, 6 feet to the bottom. The seating in my room was in the middle of a 26'foot deep room at about 12 feet from the TV.

I was much happier with the direct radiating than the WDST KSP-S6.

The WDST seemed to scater the sound too much and actually took away from the affect.

I have spoken with others that have felt the same.

You will need to try both ways before you will actualy know for sure.

Good luck

[HornEd]

With all the suggestions, there is still a "yonder" Wild Blue. With your two KSP-S6 side/surrounds boundcing sound off your side walls and both probably bouncing sound of your rear wall, the last thing you need is another KSP-S6 (or two) bouncing more sound of your sidewalls! Also, adding more KSP-S6's just contribute to more timbre disharmony with your Main KLF-30's.

Put another KLF-30 in as your Rear Center and, suddenly, you have the size, strength and timbre to compliment your Mains and offset, to some degree, the loss of directional sound intended for your rear array in the full-range 5.1 (and above) DVD mixes of today.

Of course, as someone who has six KLF-30's to preserve tone and timbre and reply upon a pair of KLF-C7's as Front Effects speakers to provide ambient sound, I know the value of having speakers match my Mains... particularly the Front Center speaker!

As a set of experiments, I borrowed a pair of KSP-S6's to replace the KLF-30 Side/Surrounds. Personally, I thought the marginal increase in marginal sound was not worth losing the timbre matching and designed directional sound modern mixes anticipate. Never-the-less, having a solid KLF-30 in the Rear Center position made the Side/Surround KSP-S6's far more easy on the ears.

I also tried putting KLF-30's as Side/Surrounds with a single KSP-S6 as a Rear Center... which seemed to work much better... and even better yet when the KSP-S6 was put on top of the KLF-30 Rear Center in a 7.1 system.

IMHO, six identical mains provide outstanding HT performance, particularly when one exceeds the Dolby reference standard for subwoofers (121.5 dB at 20 Hz) and the Front Effects provide an enlarged sound stage and contribute to an ample ambience.

-HornED

PS: Heritage systems, based on the mighty K-horn, provide the best Klipsch sound ever... and, thus, anchor the music room!

------------------

Photo update soon! -HornEd

[HornEd]

Hmmm, caught by the double post demon! Sorry folks. -HornEd

This message has been edited by HornEd on 07-22-2002 at 05:22 PM

[Wild Blue]

Wow... If I could make an entire surround setup based off of KLF-30's, that would be tempting. But expensive, and you would have the problem of having the direct radiation sound from all the surrounds instead of diffused through WDST or such.

Hmmm... i suppose you could aim the side surrounds towards the side wall "bouncing" the sound off the wall before it comes to the listener. Would deaden the sound a bit, but should still have roughly the same timber for the sound. Cool idea, wish I had the dough.