In Reply to: Impressions of Surround Sound... posted by Estes on December 29, 2001 at 17:37:10:
been there, done thatfirst let me say that if you already have nice bass response from your main stereo pair you definitely do not want to get a sub.
second: center channel is a total waste, it's most certainly a step backwards.
third: rear channels might be worth the trouble if: 1) they are small and unobtrusive, and 2) you can't tell if they are "working"
Then again, if you are a "13-year-old boy", the target market for hollywood blockbuster crap laden with car-crashes, guns, helicopters and explosions, you probably would like the incessant "boom boom boom" of a sub. And if you like to watch movies from a viewing angle of say, 60 degrees off center, and you don't have a balance control on the preamp, you probably would like a center channel.
Seriously, for almost all good films, a decent audiophile stereo pair properly set-up is as good as it gets.
Where I was: 5 Snell series D driven by Proceed Amp2 + Amp3 and Velodyne HTS18 sub for involuntary bowel movements.
Where I am: Snell series D x 2 driven by McCormack 0.5 DNA Rev. A.
the bass from the 8" acoustic suspension drivers in the Snells is much more pleasing than that from the 18" 1200watt Velo, and the imaging from the stereo pair is so good you can hardly tell it's not surround.
but, you'll probably have to go the whole way around the surround sound maze before you learn this, as I've done, twice (I'm pretty stupid).
the good news is you can pick-up all your subs and surround processors and satellites on the used market from idiots like me, who ought to know better...I'm stupid, but I'm definitely not alone.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- surround is a complete waste of time and money - petew 11:22:28 12/31/01 (7)
- Re: you are not stupid but may have hearing problem - Emad 11:15:13 01/05/02 (0)
- Re: surround is a complete waste of time and money - Valnar 19:10:42 01/03/02 (0)
- Improper setup - bstan 12:22:19 12/31/01 (4)
- wrong - petew 11:51:17 01/05/02 (3)
- Re: wrong - bstan 14:59:15 01/05/02 (2)
- apologies - petew 16:36:04 01/05/02 (1)
- Not necessary - bstan 19:49:30 01/05/02 (0)