I think you guys (A H) team could do a whole year of content on how to properly build a cedia level home theater with no details left out. How a budget home theater can maintain performance specs by sizing it correctly. What upgrades are required for each size up or row of seats you want to add.
@@PoesAcoustics he never did a part 2 on amplifiers with gene. I was looking forward to the no bullcrap science behind what you really need in an amplifier. I believe you once said in a forum that people would be surprised how often their recievers are approaching or fully clipping. Id love to know more about that.
@@williamkramer9069 because they don’t know. Movies are very dynamic. A lot more so than typical music. If you just work out how much power it takes to achieve these SPL peaks and you look at how long they are sustained for, it’s not hard to look at our amplifier test data and see that the amp will be clipping. I have a video coming on how much amplifier you need where I go into this again. I will think about how best to pull some data together to really bring the point home.
I'm sure you struggle for time to make videos but I'd love to see some content one day on using active speakers on a HT, I've always been curious about the practicalities Pos/Cons etc of using them but can't seem to find any info on the subject anywhere 👍
I'll try to do a short 3-5 minute video on it and a longer more technical one later with visuals. The short answer is that there are technical advantages, but there are also some disadvantages. The overall speaker quality in terms of performance matters more than the use of active vs passive. It's more a concern for the designer than the end user. Take a look at the Perlisten S7T and try to find how that speaker could be substantially bettered by going active. It can't be. The improvements would be marginal (and doing so could introduce things like more noise and much more difficult installation complexity. On the other hand, there are plenty of fully active studio monitors that could be bettered by any number of passive designs. The simple fact of going active is not in and of itself a benefit. It simply brings along with it a degree of flexibility that is hard to achieve passively.
@@PoesAcoustics I really appreciate you taking the time to reply, thank you. 🍻 I probably have clarified in my original comment what are the Pros/Cons pound for pound (or dollar for dollar) rather than leaving it open ended as your average HT enthusiast setting up for example 7 to 9 channels plus 4 to 6 or so overheads usually won’t pay tens of thousands per speaker. When money is no object it can obviously changes things a lot. I remember listening to you talk about how well the Kali LP-8 performed in tests, which is what actually sparked my curiosity in regards to if Active speakers would be practical in a HT set up as I realise they are not really designed for this & undoubtably come with many Cons (& Pros). Unfortunately I’ve never actually been able to find any good info on the subject so would be very interested to hear your thoughts. 🙂
@@northeastcorals buying more speakers means spending more money. I am not sure how my point is changed just because most won’t spend tens of thousands. If you set an artificial budget of $1000 per speaker average price. Buying 15 speakers is $15,000. If you re-allocated the $4000 extra toward the front three speakers, that would yield a far greater benefit. The Kali speakers are great for the money but they aren’t perfect by any means. Besides the fact that more expensive and better speakers would have better response linearity and directivity, the Kali has a fair amount of hiss. I don’t mind it in my office but it could be a problem in a very quiet theater. They also don’t play loud enough for a larger room. Should be fine in a small midfield theater where you sit 6-8 feet from the speakers. To use this price point as an example. Let’s say you were looking at 7 of the Kali LP8. Just $199 each. Very good for $199, I don’t know of anything better for $200. That is just $1400. Let’s say you also went with an in ceiling speaker of just $150 each. Something very inexpensive. Let’s go to 4, that is $600. Adding two more speakers overhead is $300 and two more lp8 is $400. That’s $700. That money is better spent on the Kali IN8 which is a little better than the LP8.
@@PoesAcoustics Very interesting thank you. In regards to setting a price budget I was curious if at different price ranges if there was any advantages to build actives vs passive. For example in the lower price range was it easier to make a good active or passives due to the cost of certain components (crossover etc) or if this was not the case & it was just dependent on the design & if that changed over price ranges. Also interesting to hear you say on a very limited budget it may be better to push more of the budget towards the LCR, rather than just dividing the budget equally on lesser speakers for the full set up. Most opinions I read say stick to the same speaker but if your budget is limited your approach makes sense to me. Apologies if my question sounded daft, I’ve been interested in home cinema for almost 2 decades but speaker science is something I never seemed to have enough time to get into.🙂
8:28 another thing I see common here is difficulty getting the wides to be the same speaker as the LCRs, and while it's fairly difficult to tell slight timbre matches to the rear (same brand, different tweeter or crossover design), in front I think the wides need to be same speaker as the LCRs. I was in a smaller room recently that had wides and I think it would have sounded better without them even though it was the same brand speaker, it still didn't match perfectly and it's noticeable in front of you where for sides and rears I don't notice slight differences. A wide dispersion LCR used in a 12x16x9 room (to use your example) might be all that is needed in the front.
@@PoesAcoustics Ok, so do you mean lcr + wides in s7t ? I am curious about your plans for the other channels/subs ? Did i understood you correctly that your advice is 4 Atmos/ceiling speakers and not 6 in a average/medium large theater room/about 35kvm ? Keep up the good work:)
@@JP-bm2fq hey JP, what is KVM? I assume a unit of volume but I wasn’t sure. Many modest sized home theaters only need 4 overhead channels. 6 isn’t adding anything useful. Yes I think the wides need to be either identical to the LCR speakers or substantially similar. In my case I have in wall S7i-LR speakers for left center and right. I can’t do another set of in walls for wides because they need to be aimed. My solution is to buy a pair of the towers. I could do an S5T and I think that would be fine. However in my case, I am a dealer and I need to be able to show clients the product. I chose the S7T because I think it’s better for that purpose.
@@JP-bm2fq ok in that scenario then it wouldn’t make sense to do anything more than a 9.1.4 setup. 6 overhead would t be necessary or valuable. The wides would be potentially useful in reducing the aperture between the L and LS or R and RS speakers. It might improve the pan stability some. However I would consider those expendable. If budget is a concern those should go. You can always move the side surrounds forward to get a simile benefit. The correct position for sides can range from just ahead to just behind the MLP.
Depends on what you are trying to achieve. Generally no this won’t cut it. If the goal is to simply improve speech intelligibility and provide better sound quality, sure. By this same token, a good soundbar and subwoofer would be fine. If the goal is to recreate an immersive sound experience, side surrounds are a minimum. You cannot recreate spatial cues or immerse yourself in the movies environment without them. In fact, side surrounds are more important than the center channel. Without that, it’s not surround. It’s stereo. You may have heard the story that when stereophonic sound was first tested, it used a center channel. It was dropped to make it easier for consumers. Records couldn’t readily contain a third channel, needles would be more expensive and complex, you would need another speaker and amplifier. They didn’t think it would sell. So they took advantage of a psychoacoustic phenomena in which if the brain recovers identical ITD and ILD signals, it splits the difference, creating the perception of a center image between the sources. Without this biological phenomena panning would not be possible.
@@PoesAcoustics thank you that’s what I’m trying to sort out. I want really good 2 channel audio with a big screen. Just not sure how immersive I want it. Probably more for music than movies. But as you said in your last video, I should at least Futureproof the room if I do decide to go there Looking forward to more of your videos.
@@bluebuddha74 I would suggest doing side surrounds. When we listen to a live band playing in a real room we get cues that tell our brain where we are. Part of what gives you that “you are there” feeling is the sensation of envelopment. That doesn’t mean surrounded by music. If a band was playing in your living room, they might be in front of you and that is where the music will come from. However, the sound that comes from their instruments would reflect around your room. Your brain hears these reflections. The lateral reflections are primarily responsible for how you perceive the size of the room. A recording of music contains these same cues. Even studio recordings may contain artificial cues. True stereo reverb for example. The addition of side surrounds let’s you transport yourself out of your room and into the environment the artist intended. 2-channel can’t do that. Instead we rely on tricks. For example, in a well treated room we can push the room to behave like a larger space than it really is. Mixed with the sound of the cues of the original musical event, we can be transported out of our room. Too a point. However this will never be as good as actual speakers at the side walls reproducing the cues. So even for large concerts or venues, I strongly suggest listening to those discs on 5.1. It will be more real and more enjoyable. Just try not to compromise the quality of the LCR speakers too much. I would honestly get rid of the center and upgrade to it later when funds allow if that was the situation.
Solid advice IMO.
This man is a crazy person! He is out of control! Everyone watch out!
That's right James. It's a dangerous world out there. Home theater mistakes are everywhere and I am here to stop them.
@@PoesAcoustics Thank god for Batman
I think you guys (A H) team could do a whole year of content on how to properly build a cedia level home theater with no details left out. How a budget home theater can maintain performance specs by sizing it correctly. What upgrades are required for each size up or row of seats you want to add.
Grimani and I will start doing a monthly series starting on the 16th. We can make that the topics. Let me talk with him.
@@PoesAcoustics he never did a part 2 on amplifiers with gene. I was looking forward to the no bullcrap science behind what you really need in an amplifier. I believe you once said in a forum that people would be surprised how often their recievers are approaching or fully clipping. Id love to know more about that.
@@williamkramer9069 it’s true. Clipping is far more common than people realize.
@@PoesAcoustics stuff like that is never covered by the other channels that recycle or dont understand the concepts you guys cover.
@@williamkramer9069 because they don’t know.
Movies are very dynamic. A lot more so than typical music. If you just work out how much power it takes to achieve these SPL peaks and you look at how long they are sustained for, it’s not hard to look at our amplifier test data and see that the amp will be clipping.
I have a video coming on how much amplifier you need where I go into this again. I will think about how best to pull some data together to really bring the point home.
I'm sure you struggle for time to make videos but I'd love to see some content one day on using active speakers on a HT, I've always been curious about the practicalities Pos/Cons etc of using them but can't seem to find any info on the subject anywhere 👍
I'll try to do a short 3-5 minute video on it and a longer more technical one later with visuals. The short answer is that there are technical advantages, but there are also some disadvantages.
The overall speaker quality in terms of performance matters more than the use of active vs passive. It's more a concern for the designer than the end user. Take a look at the Perlisten S7T and try to find how that speaker could be substantially bettered by going active. It can't be. The improvements would be marginal (and doing so could introduce things like more noise and much more difficult installation complexity. On the other hand, there are plenty of fully active studio monitors that could be bettered by any number of passive designs. The simple fact of going active is not in and of itself a benefit. It simply brings along with it a degree of flexibility that is hard to achieve passively.
@@PoesAcoustics I really appreciate you taking the time to reply, thank you. 🍻
I probably have clarified in my original comment what are the Pros/Cons pound for pound (or dollar for dollar) rather than leaving it open ended as your average HT enthusiast setting up for example 7 to 9 channels plus 4 to 6 or so overheads usually won’t pay tens of thousands per speaker.
When money is no object it can obviously changes things a lot.
I remember listening to you talk about how well the Kali LP-8 performed in tests, which is what actually sparked my curiosity in regards to if Active speakers would be practical in a HT set up as I realise they are not really designed for this & undoubtably come with many Cons (& Pros). Unfortunately I’ve never actually been able to find any good info on the subject so would be very interested to hear your thoughts. 🙂
@@northeastcorals buying more speakers means spending more money. I am not sure how my point is changed just because most won’t spend tens of thousands. If you set an artificial budget of $1000 per speaker average price. Buying 15 speakers is $15,000. If you re-allocated the $4000 extra toward the front three speakers, that would yield a far greater benefit.
The Kali speakers are great for the money but they aren’t perfect by any means. Besides the fact that more expensive and better speakers would have better response linearity and directivity, the Kali has a fair amount of hiss. I don’t mind it in my office but it could be a problem in a very quiet theater.
They also don’t play loud enough for a larger room. Should be fine in a small midfield theater where you sit 6-8 feet from the speakers.
To use this price point as an example. Let’s say you were looking at 7 of the Kali LP8. Just $199 each. Very good for $199, I don’t know of anything better for $200. That is just $1400. Let’s say you also went with an in ceiling speaker of just $150 each. Something very inexpensive. Let’s go to 4, that is $600. Adding two more speakers overhead is $300 and two more lp8 is $400. That’s $700. That money is better spent on the Kali IN8 which is a little better than the LP8.
@@PoesAcoustics Very interesting thank you.
In regards to setting a price budget I was curious if at different price ranges if there was any advantages to build actives vs passive. For example in the lower price range was it easier to make a good active or passives due to the cost of certain components (crossover etc) or if this was not the case & it was just dependent on the design & if that changed over price ranges.
Also interesting to hear you say on a very limited budget it may be better to push more of the budget towards the LCR, rather than just dividing the budget equally on lesser speakers for the full set up. Most opinions I read say stick to the same speaker but if your budget is limited your approach makes sense to me.
Apologies if my question sounded daft, I’ve been interested in home cinema for almost 2 decades but speaker science is something I never seemed to have enough time to get into.🙂
8:28 another thing I see common here is difficulty getting the wides to be the same speaker as the LCRs, and while it's fairly difficult to tell slight timbre matches to the rear (same brand, different tweeter or crossover design), in front I think the wides need to be same speaker as the LCRs. I was in a smaller room recently that had wides and I think it would have sounded better without them even though it was the same brand speaker, it still didn't match perfectly and it's noticeable in front of you where for sides and rears I don't notice slight differences. A wide dispersion LCR used in a 12x16x9 room (to use your example) might be all that is needed in the front.
Yeah good point. Wides really should be the same as the LCR’s or as close as possible.
The plan for my system is a set of S7T towers.
@@PoesAcoustics Ok, so do you mean lcr + wides in s7t ? I am curious about your plans for the other channels/subs ?
Did i understood you correctly that your advice is 4 Atmos/ceiling speakers and not 6 in a average/medium large theater room/about 35kvm ?
Keep up the good work:)
@@JP-bm2fq hey JP, what is KVM? I assume a unit of volume but I wasn’t sure.
Many modest sized home theaters only need 4 overhead channels. 6 isn’t adding anything useful.
Yes I think the wides need to be either identical to the LCR speakers or substantially similar. In my case I have in wall S7i-LR speakers for left center and right. I can’t do another set of in walls for wides because they need to be aimed. My solution is to buy a pair of the towers. I could do an S5T and I think that would be fine. However in my case, I am a dealer and I need to be able to show clients the product. I chose the S7T because I think it’s better for that purpose.
@@PoesAcoustics
Thanks!
1ft2 = 0,09m2/kvm 35m2 is about 377 square foot🤔 I hope I got that right...
@@JP-bm2fq ok in that scenario then it wouldn’t make sense to do anything more than a 9.1.4 setup. 6 overhead would t be necessary or valuable. The wides would be potentially useful in reducing the aperture between the L and LS or R and RS speakers. It might improve the pan stability some. However I would consider those expendable. If budget is a concern those should go. You can always move the side surrounds forward to get a simile benefit. The correct position for sides can range from just ahead to just behind the MLP.
Thx for this. Great info/wisdom. But wait, aren't the hottest new thing on the market actually.... Perlistens?!? 🤣
Any opinion on JBL Synthesis SCL-6?
Can the bare minimum simply be LCR plus a sub?
Depends on what you are trying to achieve. Generally no this won’t cut it. If the goal is to simply improve speech intelligibility and provide better sound quality, sure. By this same token, a good soundbar and subwoofer would be fine.
If the goal is to recreate an immersive sound experience, side surrounds are a minimum. You cannot recreate spatial cues or immerse yourself in the movies environment without them. In fact, side surrounds are more important than the center channel. Without that, it’s not surround. It’s stereo.
You may have heard the story that when stereophonic sound was first tested, it used a center channel. It was dropped to make it easier for consumers. Records couldn’t readily contain a third channel, needles would be more expensive and complex, you would need another speaker and amplifier. They didn’t think it would sell. So they took advantage of a psychoacoustic phenomena in which if the brain recovers identical ITD and ILD signals, it splits the difference, creating the perception of a center image between the sources. Without this biological phenomena panning would not be possible.
@@PoesAcoustics thank you that’s what I’m trying to sort out. I want really good 2 channel audio with a big screen. Just not sure how immersive I want it. Probably more for music than movies. But as you said in your last video, I should at least Futureproof the room if I do decide to go there Looking forward to more of your videos.
@@bluebuddha74 I would suggest doing side surrounds.
When we listen to a live band playing in a real room we get cues that tell our brain where we are. Part of what gives you that “you are there” feeling is the sensation of envelopment. That doesn’t mean surrounded by music. If a band was playing in your living room, they might be in front of you and that is where the music will come from. However, the sound that comes from their instruments would reflect around your room. Your brain hears these reflections. The lateral reflections are primarily responsible for how you perceive the size of the room. A recording of music contains these same cues. Even studio recordings may contain artificial cues. True stereo reverb for example. The addition of side surrounds let’s you transport yourself out of your room and into the environment the artist intended.
2-channel can’t do that. Instead we rely on tricks. For example, in a well treated room we can push the room to behave like a larger space than it really is. Mixed with the sound of the cues of the original musical event, we can be transported out of our room. Too a point. However this will never be as good as actual speakers at the side walls reproducing the cues.
So even for large concerts or venues, I strongly suggest listening to those discs on 5.1. It will be more real and more enjoyable.
Just try not to compromise the quality of the LCR speakers too much. I would honestly get rid of the center and upgrade to it later when funds allow if that was the situation.
@@PoesAcoustics this is helpful. Thank you so much.
Look out Gene! James is hot!