Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
Sign in to follow this  
boomac

Front and Rear Center Speakers - Use the Same?

Recommended Posts

I've noticed several posters are using the same speaker for their front and rear center channels. I was under the impression that the rear center was best matched with the rear surrounds. Lets say, for example, that you had Quartets up front with an Academy Center and Heresy IIs for surrounds. What would be the best choice for the rear center? Another Academy, another Heresy II or ? Or, what if the front center was custom made to match the Quartets. Then what for the rear center?

boomac

HT System

Still putting it together!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMVHO I'd match the rear speakers with your rear center. The soundtrack that comes from that rear center channel will be closer in content to the soundtrack in the rears than the fronts, so you'll want it to actually sound similar, I would think.

DD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the general theory for home theatre sound states to have direct, localized sound for the front speakers and to have diffuse sound for the surrounds (witness the design of Klipsch surrounds), it makes no sense at all to utilize a beamy, costly, centre channel-type cabinet design for the rear center. I believe that using three similar speakers across the rear will aid in de-localizing the sounds from each rear area.

Michael- Klipsch fan for 20 years- cornwall mains, KC7 centre, KSB1.1 all over the house

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

On 3/6/2003 8:43:45 PM colterphoto1 wrote:

If the general theory for home theatre sound states to have direct, localized sound for the front speakers and to have diffuse sound for the surrounds (witness the design of Klipsch surrounds), it makes no sense at all to utilize a beamy, costly, centre channel-type cabinet design for the rear center. I believe that using three similar speakers across the rear will aid in de-localizing the sounds from each rear area.

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

I disagree. I am using an RC-7 in the rear center along with the RS-7 surrounds. I tried other setups, including 2 of the diffuse WDST type speakers for the rear (for a 7.1 setup). I found out that in my particular room and setup, I like the sound of the RC-7 in the rear the best. It just seems to "anchor" the rear better.

This is one of the "holy wars" that seems to erupt on here every now and again - Monopole/Direct radiating vs Di/Tripole/Diffuse surrounds. It seems that the latest trend coming out of Dolby is to have identical speakers, (i.e. RF-7s) all the way around - especially if listing to multi-channel music (DVD-A, SACD, Concert DVDs). This also explains why most of those "sub/sat" systems have identical satellite speakers for all 5 or 6 of the channels. Of course, it is not always feasible for both budget and space reasons to have identical speakers all the way around (I know there is no way in hell that I can fit 6 RF-7s in this room!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

thanks for your thoughts on rear center channel speakers. I'm currently using only Dolby Pro Logic with my Yamaha 850. Looking to buy the 2300 or 3300 so I'll be either 6.1 or 8.1 (with Yamaha front effects, which I probably won't use.)

In my last post, I was speaking entirely theoretically, since I've never wired a 5.1 or 6.1 system. I know that the rear channels are 'full' spectrum frequency response, therefore the attempt to match the fronts both in terms of efficiency and timbre are critical. I don't know how much information is contained in DVD's or SACD's in terms of discrete rear channel information, and how much separation is in those recorded channels. I would think that if the information contained in these 3 channels is intended to be localized for the listener in the prime location, that direct-radiating speakers would be best for ALL THREE REAR speakers. If the sounds are intended to be diffuse, then again, bi-polar or some type of diffuse-radiating speakers would be called for in ALL THREE REAR speakers. I cannot imagine (speaking theoretically here again, trying to put myself in the recording engineers shoes) how you could possibly need diffuse sound in the L/R rears, but require localized sound in the center channel, unless the mix was VERY specialized with respect to sound moving from front center to rear center.

Not trying to 'flame' here, just interested in your thoughts and YOUR EXPERIENCES with sounds from different sources. Q- Is the sound mix drastically different with SACD's than DVD's, such that the purchaser should determine his 'main' listening source and arrance speakers in accordance with this? (i.e. is a principally SACD music setup vastly different from a principally DVD setup)

Thanks for your input

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

On 3/11/2003 8:00:48 PM colterphoto1 wrote:

Steve,

In my last post, I was speaking entirely theoretically, since I've never wired a 5.1 or 6.1 system. I know that the rear channels are 'full' spectrum frequency response, therefore the attempt to match the fronts both in terms of efficiency and timbre are critical. I don't know how much information is contained in DVD's or SACD's in terms of discrete rear channel information, and how much separation is in those recorded channels. I would think that if the information contained in these 3 channels is intended to be localized for the listener in the prime location, that direct-radiating speakers would be best for ALL THREE REAR speakers. If the sounds are intended to be diffuse, then again, bi-polar or some type of diffuse-radiating speakers would be called for in ALL THREE REAR speakers. I cannot imagine (speaking theoretically here again, trying to put myself in the recording engineers shoes) how you could possibly need diffuse sound in the L/R rears, but require localized sound in the center channel, unless the mix was VERY specialized with respect to sound moving from front center to rear center.

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

No flames here - definitly like to try to keep a civil discussion (and like I mention, holy wars have erupted on this very topic).

Yes, in theory, it would seem to make sense to have either all three diffuse type speakers or all three full-range direct radiating (monopole) speakers for the rear sound-stage in a 6.1 setup. The trend does seem to be towards the later. However, I know all to well how something in theory actually ends up working in reality (I am, afterall, a software engineer that has worked on some very technical projects, where many a theory have been completely blown to hell in actual implementation). In my particular setup, having an RC-7 just seem to work so much better than having an RS-7 back there in the rear center. I don't know if it is just the size of my room and/or the acoustical nature of the room and environment, but it just plain works. Maybe in your setup, a different configuration will work better, thus the reason why people really do need to, if they can, try out different setups to see what they like (thus one of the reasons why I liked working with a local dealer).

However, sometime next week or the week after, I am going to take advantage of a clearance deal on Klipsch at the local dealer and score myself a pair of RF-5s to use as the side surrounds, which are full-range floor standing towers (although not as big as the RF-7s). Will be interesting to see how this will work out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the direct radiating camp for the moment. Steve, you should try and get the RF-5s if you can and at least experiment with them. I think the RC-7 is one of the best speakers on the market. I was thinking about using them for rear surrounds but I use RF-5s. I was using 2 RS-7s and moved them from rear to side surrounds interchanging them with the RF-5s but I just couldn't get enough separation with the RS-7s in MY ROOM. So I don't use them in my main system anymore. I just felt they were dispersing the sound a little too much in my situation to the point I was having trouble differentiating the rear and surround tracks. I'm a picky guy so it annoyed me. Now I use RF-7's for Fronts AND left and right surrounds and the RF-5s for the rear surrounds. Im not saying it is perfect because nothing ever is with me. Everyones listening area is different and needs to be taken into consideration before deciding that direct all around is the only way to go and completely eliminate a speaker that diffuses the sound like the RS-7s in their systems. It's a tough one but I would buy RF-5s without hesitation. That goes for RF-7s and the great center RC-7. As for the RS-7s, well, lets just say they're definitely NOT for sale. 1.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesting article written a year or so ago than lends a lot of creedence to the configuration Steve has described. The study configured a 6.1 and 7.1 system with various commbinations of monopoles, dipoles and direct radiating speakers for the surrounds and rear center. As Steve has pointed out, the room configuration has a lot to do with what sounds best. In the article, I seem to recall that the author found that a 6.1 configuration generally sounded better if the surrounds were dispersion type designs but the rear was a direct radiating speaker. This configuration tended to better anchor the sound, without being overly localized or overly dispersed. Interestingly enough, the author found that in a 7.1 system, the use of direct radiating speakers for the rear centers tended to cause the listener to localize on the right or left rear center channel, therefore degrading the surround experience. There was some discussion of the way the human ear processes sounds, particularly when the listener is closer to one rear speaker than the other.

Net-net, it was a very interesting article...I'll post the link this evening if I can find it.

C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my knowledge their is no "true" dedicated rear center channel output on any receiver. You can choose whether to use a single speaker or pair of speakers to the surround/effects outputs. My Denon 4800 has provisions for Surround (A), Surround (B), and Side Effects/Surrounds. For a time when I was using the Denon AVR 3300 I Y'd the center channel output to separate mono blocks and ran it to the Front La Scala and a rear KV-4 this worked well lots of clean dialogue. When I got the 4800 I tried using the effects outputs fed to a outboard amp to the rear center but it did not have the vocal detail I was used to. I opted to set it up as Denon suggested using three pairs of rears Surrounds A & B and Side Effects/Surrounds. I also have two sets of mains, one pair running off receiver power the other off an outboard amp. All this reference to rear center is confusing since their is really no such thing, all you are doing is using a single speaker instead of a pair in the rear as additional surrounds right? I may go back to my original setup of Y'ing the center channel outs and feeding a true rear center. Am I missing something or what. So I am actually running a psuedo 11.2 setup (10 speakers, 1 center, and 2 subs) it sounds damn good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

On 3/12/2003 2:07:05 PM Frzninvt wrote:

To my knowledge their is no "true" dedicated rear center channel output on any receiver.

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

My Denon AVR3802 can do true 6.1 surround and does indeed have a dedicated output for the rear. In fact, it has hookups for 7.1, but the two rear outputs in a 7.1 just gets the same signal. In a 6.1 setup, I have the rear speaker hooked up to (IIRC) only the right rear output and told the setup routine that only 1 speaker is in the rear (thus disabling the left rear output). I can also setup two sets of side surrounds, an 'A' set and a 'B' set and switch between the two or run them all together. I am going to get the RF-5s and set them up as 'B' surrounds, thus I can switch between them and the RS-7s, both for testing and perhaps select one set for movies and the other set for music (The instruction guide suggests that is why the feature is in the receiver).

Back to the 6.1 setup. If I am playing a DVD with true 6.1 encoded material (DTS NEO:6, for example), I get a true discreet channel going to the rear. In 5.1 encoded material, I can matrix the rear (and the reciever actually does a really nice job with that). I don't have to do none of that crazy hooking up Y-cables to outboard amps and so forth to get that rear channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That still is not a "true" rear center channel though (dedicated to soundtrack dialogue), you are just using a single (rear surround/effect) speaker instead of a pair, and using a single surround output on the receiver and then telling the receiver it is a single in the setup. My Denon AVR-4800 has the same thing. So the proper term should be Single Rear Effect Speaker and not Rear Center Channel. There are only 8 channels (Front L & R), (Rear L & R) Center, Subwoofer, (Surrounds L & R) their is "NO" dedicated provision for a rear center channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...