If dialogue clarity is the key criteria

[edc]

First of all thanks again to all of you as my path into surround sound has been mostly defined by you through posting my threads and reading others.

 

I am still floundering with the speaker selection.  I am zeroing in on a newer Sony amp (ZA-3000ES).  I have a 70" Sony 4K TV on order.  I plan to keep my Forte's as L and R front speakers.  I would like some advice (maybe additional advice would be more accurate) on the center channel.  I will either use a temporary solution while I find another Forte or Forte II to match the three front speakers perfectly.  Another option is to just buy a new RC-62 to use with the two Forte's.  After this is decided I will rebuild my cabinetry to suit the speaker decision.

 

I have been told that considering music, and movies, etc. the three Forte's would be a great setup.  I have also had some non-forum advice that a newer possibly crisper sound speaker design would be a good center channel to address my desire to improve my ability to understand dialogue better than I do now with just a stereo amp or TV sound system.  Most agree that the center channel is probably the most important speaker in the system.   So, should I continue my search to find another Forte,  or should I use an RC-62 as a center channel -- considering dialogue primarily?     Thank You Again,  Ed  

[Sancho Panza]

Another Forte.

[CECAA850]

This ^^^^

[CECAA850]

Or a Heresy if space is an issue.

[edc]

When looking around for these used speakers I see there are different Heresy models I, II, III.  Would some be better than others for matching my Forte's ?  So CECAA850 and Sanchez I am reading your responses as first choice would be another Forte (I or II I assume), a close second would be a Heritage -- very similar to the Forte but a little smaller.  Both being preferable to the RC-62.   Thanks guy for the time,  I have little or no experience to make these calls myself.  I have a mongrel bookcase speaker I will likely use as a center until I find a Forte or Heresy.

   Ed

[dtel]

Welcome............your on the right track

I would stick with another Forte if it were me...ok I did

 

Really it makes a perfectly seamless front, anything else is not quite the same, now to find another, this is the problem, but it will be worth it.

 

You could always use something else until you find a match, no problem as long as you don't go to small where there is a big difference in sound considering how much info is through the center. Hook up that mongrel speaker as a center and you will probably hear exactly why a center is so important. 

Just guessing Hersey l or ll may be a better match than the lll version, I tried the forte ll alongside a Heresy l and ll and it was a closer match than expected as far as the mids and highs went, the forte had more bass. 

 

You could always try phantom for a center until you find a match, unless your room is really wide.

Edited January 14, 2015 by dtel

[CECAA850]

Yes, a Forte first.  If space is an issue, go with a Heresy.  If you cross over the low stuff to a sub, a Heresy and Forte sound pretty much alike.

[Sancho Panza]

IF he has to go Heresy, I think Heresy II would be the closest match: same mid-range.

Quartet could also work well...

Edited January 14, 2015 by Sancho Panza

[Youthman]

Solid advice from the guys above.  I too would vote for a single Forte.  I wasn't sure how long it would take to find a single La Scala for my setup.  I put a WTB in the Garage Sale and within a few weeks, I purchased one from a forum member.  Might work for you as well.

[edc]

Thanks all.  Good suggestion Youthman, I'll look into that.  I have found a set of Forte' II's that are a few hours drive from me (northern Calif) and I hope to be able to get to them by this weekend.  I probably can't just get one of them but I can always try to sell one later -- there must be someone else doing what I am trying to do .   I have found others on ebay but with this size speaker the shipping is an issue (most refuse to ship at all).  Now that I have settled on a goal (3 Forte's) I will find one or two soon hopefully. 

[Youthman]

I probably can't just get one of them but I can always try to sell one later -- there must be someone else doing what I am trying to do .

Maybe more than you think.

 

Shipping a speaker that large is a pain and you risk of it getting damaged.  Can't blame them for not wanting to.

[Sancho Panza]

Use the Forte II & main & Forte as Center.

[dtel]

I ended up finding 2 pair of ll's and a pair of originals. I use 3 of the ll's across the front and the originals for rears, with the extra ll as a center rear for 6.1. It was either that or store the other ll being I don't want to sell it. 

 

I thought about selling all of them and going all pro using the speakers we use for 2 Ch as mains and adding other pro models for rears and a center. The wife said she didn't care but were not selling any of the fortes, so it stays separated, probably best in the long run anyway to keep it 2 separated systems.

[wvu80]

I'll speak for the minority position, but with some qualifications.

 

I think your best advice would come from someone who has already done what you want to do.  Those above who have a 3 Forte setup would be in the best position to tell you what that sounds like.  I have never heard that set up.

 

In my setup, I have a couple of horn loaded 2-ways (10" woofs 12" horn) for L/R, and a dedicated MTM center with 7" woofs and a dome tweeter.  My center was designed to be a center and dialog is clear as a bell.  I am also in the minority because most recommend "timbre matching" L/C/R.  My L/C/R are certainly not timbre matched, but because all three speakers are very good quality I get excellent results. 

 

 

I know this from listening to my setup in my living room.  About 95% of the time the sound is NOT distributed evenly across the L/C/R.  My AVR sends music and some stereo effects into L/R, and 90% of the dialog gets sent to the center speaker.  I also listen to mostly TV (50/50 stereo and 5.1), not movies, so that should also be taken into consideration.

 

My vote would be for a center channel which is designed to be center channel, due to the cross over being designed with dialog in mind.  In your case, I would suggest you try the Forte's first and if that doesn't give you the clarity of dialog you are looking for, you can sell your Forte's for about what you paid for them, and go with a center channel that was designed for that purpose.

 

In other words, I don't think you are going to go wrong either way.

 

 

[mustang guy]

I would buy a pair of Fortes, and put one of them as the rear center channel unless you don't have room for a rear center. Home theaters with a single rear center channel instead of 2 are called 6.1, and it is a step up from a 5.1, and pretty close to as good as a 7.1. If you really wanted to immerse yourself, buy 2 pairs of Fortes and have 6.1 using Fortes. I use LaScalas in a 6.2 configuration, and it sounds better than the best Atmos theater I have been in.

 

EDIT: Correction. I actually run an 8.2 with 6 LaScalas and two Heresy's as front wides.

Edited January 15, 2015 by mustang guy

[edc]

Wow guys, lots of good insight, thks.   I do not have room for Forte's as rears or rear center speakers.  I plan to start with 3.0 and then if I get decent dialogue I will add smaller rears mounted up near the ceiling and a subwoofer somewhere.  WVU80 you are making a point similar to what I heard from a non-forum source and that is what motivated me to start this thread and ask about the choice with dialogue as the main criteria.  Most of you advise use of a Forte as a center and it some of you have that or something similar so you have heard the results.  While it is not impossible to go with the three Forte's and then change later it is a path I hope I don't have to take as I will build a couple of cabinets to go between the three Forte's for amps and equipment.  I guess if the dialogue is obviously not improved I can chage paths quickly but from what I am hearing I will likely be very impressed with the three Forte's.  An easier path would be to just get an RC-62 center, keep my current cabinet and then if I didn't like the results I could get another Forte later -- but I might always wonder what the 3 Forte's would have provided.  Life is tough, but isn't it wonderful we have these kinds of choices to make.  Thanks guys, even if the election is not unanimous.

[Scrappydue]

I don't see how any speaker is designed for center channel use minus the fact it's layed sideways. Which is a compromise. Have you tried any speaker on the left or right then scoot a forte in the middle just to try it out?

[wvu80]

I don't see how any speaker is designed for center channel use minus the fact it's layed sideways. Which is a compromise. Have you tried any speaker on the left or right then scoot a forte in the middle just to try it out?

 

My first forray into DIY was a set of Zaph Audio 5.3 MTM and a Zaph Audio 5.3C speakers.  They all shared the same drivers, but the L/R had rear ports and were wider and were made to stand vertically.  The center had front ports, was designed to lay horizontally, and it had a completely different crossover and enclosure tuning to accent dialog. 

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/mtm-speaker-kits/zaph|audio-za5.3c-center-channel-single-with-cabinet/

 

Zaph had extensive and specific comments on the design of how the center was different from the MTM.  This was the basis for my thinking that center speakers had very specific and different requirements for a center speaker as opposed to mains.  The following quote is from the Zaph web site on the subject:

 

This is a version of the MTM design done specifically for horizontal center channel usage. It is also workable as a near boundary or near TV design. You will hear many people say that a MTM is just not good for horizontal usage, and for the most part they are right. The problem is that upright center channels will not work with the average home theater layout, unless you are lucky enough to have a front projector with a sound transparent screen. But for most of the HT world, we've got to squeeze the center channel between the TV and the furniture it's mounted in/on.

 

We can however optimize some of the typical MTM off axis response issues out of it, and give it a tonal balance that favors dialog. That is exactly what we've done here, and it's a completely different crossover rather than just an option based on the standard MTM. The crossover point has been dropped down a bit, though still not as low as the TM. There is very little baffle step compensation in this design, and the overall tonal balance favors a broad smooth rise through the upper midrange. The result of that can be seen in comparing the vertical polar responses between this and the standard MTM version. We've widened the listening window when this system is laid horizontal, and even when the response starts to droop due woofer center to center distance, a mild increase in the upper midrange minimizes the effect. The result is a horizontal MTM with a forward listening window of about 50 degrees from side to side. This is much more usable than the typical commercial center channel, which usually has serious lobing issues even 5 degrees off the horizontal axis. An MTM will never be as suitable as a W-T/M-W 3-way center, but here we've done our best with the format. Complaints of dialog audibility should be minimal.

 

http://zaphaudio.com/ZA5/

Edited January 15, 2015 by wvu80

[dtel]

Have you tried any speaker on the left or right then scoot a forte in the middle just to try it out?

 

I never did, I did have a smaller Synergy speaker (SC- 1) for a center between the forte ll's for a while until I found another pair. It was not good at all, but it was because it was so far undersized compared to the mains in a big room, and sounded that way.

 

 

I plan to start with 3.0 and then if I get decent dialogue I will add smaller rears mounted up near the ceiling and a subwoofer somewhere.

 

Myself, even though I have fortes for the back 3 I don't think it's nearly as important as the front 3, I would think your idea would be fine for rears. Just try to stay with klipsch, that way you will not have any big differences with efficiency. I hear to much of a difference can make it hard to get adjusted to match all the volumes.

[jjptkd]

 I just listed a pair of Forte II's on eBay, one has wax on the grill cover. I'd be willing to split the set if you're interested and ship one to you. I'm thinking $300 plus actual shipping cost? Figured I'd through it out there, PM me if you're interested, thanks.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Klipsch-Forte-II-Main-Stereo-Speakers-Wax-on-Grill-Cover-Work-Perfect-Local-PU-/321642144014?ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT

Edited January 15, 2015 by jjptkd