Center Speaker - Yes or No?

D

Dom H

Guest
It had to be done didn't it :clown:


Center speakers impede clarity and are only necessary for off-axis listening <runs away and hides>
 

Jase

Distinguished Member
Originally posted by Dom H
It had to be done didn't it :clown:


Center speakers impede clarity and are only necessary for off-axis listening <runs away and hides>

Flee, flee, run away!;)

Centre speaker for me personally. Mine matches the front left & right exactly though.:) I can see where you´re coming from, with regards to not having a centre speaker.
 

Jeff

Distinguished Member
Originally posted by Dom H
It had to be done didn't it :clown:


Center speakers impede clarity and are only necessary for off-axis listening <runs away and hides>

Maybe in a prologic setup, but with DD or DTS your front sound stage is likely to get butchered by your receiver when mixing the dedicated centre channel sound into the front left and right speakers.
 
B

bob007

Guest
Centre for me as well.

It's better than have ornaments on top of the telly. :D
 
D

Dom H

Guest
but with DD or DTS your front sound stage is likely to get butchered by your receiver when mixing the dedicated centre channel sound into the front left and right speakers.
Why?


Show me a dedicated center speaker that performs as well as the matching mains.
 

Jase

Distinguished Member
Originally posted by Dom H



Show me a dedicated center speaker that performs as well as the matching mains.

M&K 150 THX.;)
 

Jeff

Distinguished Member
I didn't say anything about speakers, I agree with you that in Theory a centre channel may not be needed. The problem is that DD and DTS are designed to use a centre channel, without one its up to your receiver to mix the sound into the left and right channels. Something like a Lexicon probably does a good job, I know my Denon AVC-A1SE isn't up to it.
 

Ian J

Banned
Centre speaker definately for 5.1 otherwise it isn't 5.1 and therefore (buzz phrase coming) not as the director intended.
 
B

bob007

Guest
We know that dedicated centre speakers can let a system down, but lets not get confused by the speaker and the dedicated channel itself. If it's the speaker in question then running three identical speakers eg. 3xM&X 150 THX will yeild far better results than 2xsatellite/bookshelf/floorstanders and a dedicated centre, and personally think these would be better than no centre at all, given the centre was of a decent quality.

If it's the centre channel in question then why have the sound companies released 5.1 and not 4.1. If you are downmixing/re-directing/matrixing a signal meant for a dedicated channel surely quality is going to be lost. I'm no expert but if soundtrack is encoded in 5.1 I will listen though a system built to handle 5.1, to me phantom, matrixing and DSP modes to me are false.

My son is running 3xMX2's across the front, the difference was so obvious. Got to be some truth here. ;)
 
D

Dom H

Guest
If it's the centre channel in question then why have the sound companies released 5.1 and not 4.1. If you are downmixing/re-directing/matrixing a signal meant for a dedicated channel surely quality is going to be lost. I'm no expert but if soundtrack is encoded in 5.1 I will listen though a system built to handle 5.1, to me phantom, matrixing and DSP modes to me are false.
A center channel needs to be in place for all the poor saps sitting off center.

Rerouting the center info to the mains isn't matrixing, DD is decoded anyway, bass is re-routed to a sub, sending center info through the mains I don't think will give any loss in clarity.
 
B

bob007

Guest
Originally posted by Dom H
A center channel needs to be in place for all the poor saps sitting off center.

So a phantom centre is the choice of all single/billy-no-mates saddos then. :p :D
 

James45

Standard Member
Centre for me. My matching Gallos will do a fantastic job up front... when I get an amp that is....:rolleyes: :mad: I'm almost tempted to go and load up the credit card tomorrow:(
 

lynx

Moderator
Originally posted by Dom H

Show me a dedicated center speaker that performs as well as the matching mains.
Tannoy RC
 
D

Dom H

Guest
So a phantom centre is the choice of all single/billy-no-mates saddos then.
:p

The sweet spot is wide enough for me and my gf, I'm not putting in a center just for when there is more of us!

By definition center speakers are inferior. Anyway why stop at 3 across the front, why not throw in a few more! Perhaps it's because less is more and 3 is the minimum needed to lock the dialogue to the screen.

If you've got mains that image well (and you sit in the middle/are selfish) why screw it up with another (inferior) speaker?

If you were listening to 2ch audio and someone came and wired a speaker in the middle and lobbed it on top of the tv you'd scream with disgust!

If they released 3ch audio cd's would you buy them? (god knows why sacd has a center??:confused: )
 
M

MikeK

Guest
I'm not sure of the reason why centre speakers would be inferior by definition - in practice though they sometimes are, but by no means always!
What about setups which use identical speakers for LRC?
And what about setups whose L&R positioning is less than pinpoint?


They probably don't throw in any more speakers, as no more are needed :)
What would you send to them - there are no more channels (at the front).

3-channel audio CDs?
It wouldn't surprise me if they have. :)
You have DTS CDs, SACD and DVD-A, which all have the potential for using a centre speaker (and many do).
In any case, audio only is a slightly different proposition - you really have nothing visual which needs any audio "locking" onto it.
Lie back, close your eyes and relax with some of your favourite tunes - not really a realistic possibility watching a film:) (well OK, some films perhaps :) )


If you find phantom centre operation more to your liking, that's fine - nothing is set in stone, and I wouldn't argue that in some cases it may well be preferable. However, those of us who remember the dark times, will remember how much of an improvement ProLogic was over Dolby Surround, even for those sitting in the sweet spot. For the most part, I think it's the same today. IMO, if you think it sounds worse with a centre speaker, you are probably using a poorly matched centre speaker - get a better one :) :p

Easy enough to try it though, for those who's interest may have been tweaked, just select No Centre on the amp, and see what you think!
 
D

Dom H

Guest
I'm not sure of the reason why centre speakers would be inferior by definition
1. Horizontal, usually MTM arrangement
2. Timbre will likely be different
3. Small(er) enclosure
4. Usually poor positioning/isolation
5. Height/Distance will likely be different

3 identical speakers are better (but highly impractical) but I still prefer 2 because you only need 2 sources to pinpoint a point, 3 would add inaccuracy.
They probably don't throw in any more speakers, as no more are needed
What would you send to them - there are no more channels (at the front).
Why not, why don't they produce 10.1 or whatever with 5+ speakers across the front? More is more right? ;)
In any case, audio only is a slightly different proposition - you really have nothing visual which needs any audio "locking" onto it.
No 'locking' is required if you sit central.

2 speakers is all you need for a perfect soundstage (in a 'perfect' room)

If the room isn't ideal accoustically speaking or you don't sit central then a center would be preferable.
 
U

uncle eric

Guest
Dom,
I will reply to this when I have some time later this evening. Get the asbestos suit ready :D
 
U

uncle eric

Guest
Ok Dom, here goes.
A few quotes from myself taken from past posts. These point out the unfavourable use (IMO) of so called dedicated centre speakers. In other words "purpose built" centre speakers by various manufacturers. Here are some golden oldies.

Originally posted by uncle eric
On to the speaker set up.
M&K speakers are, or should I say can be, fantastic performers.
Many thousands of pounds have been spent in this install and I'm sorry to say that the potential performance of these fine speakers have been dramaticaly compromised.
Prestige Audio used only one M&K 150 for the centre channel and a pair of 125's for the L/R channel.
I hope Prestige are not CEDIA members. One of the CEDIA guidlines stipulate (for reasons detailed below) that IDENTICAL SPEAKERS BE USED FOR LEFT/ CENTER/ RIGHT CHANNELS.
*Side note, they also state that equal power should be used for all channels including surrounds.*
At least the Amp Manufacturers are listening even if some installers are not.
Again, as these important questions were not asked at the time, I will have to use my logic and assume that Prestige Audio's argument for substituting the cheaper 125's for the 150's for use in the L/R channels were probably three fold.
Firstly costs are kept down (the only real argument)
Secondly, most of the sound output from a multi channel system comes from the centre or dialogue channel and this is covered by a very high quality speaker, the cheaper non-THX L/R will matter less!
And thirdly, the front three use the same drivers anyway and should sound the same.
Wrong on all counts.
Firstly, for 55 grand, 150's could and should have been used for the front three LCR's.
Secondly, the accuracy of the front soundstage is crytical for both movies and music. While its fair to say that the centre speaker is indeed the most active, the L/R speakers play a vital part in the general presentation of the wide front soundstage that todays fantastic sound mix's have to offer.
Lastly, same drivers does not mean same timbre. This is one of the biggest myths in speaker design today.
This is also the reason that M&K will sell you any number of speakers in any model. In fact they are one of only a handfull of manufacturers who do this.
The others are still in their respective coma's. Most sell a main L/R and a so called dedicated centre speaker with, and heres the selling point, the same drivers for timbre matching.
I'm afraid the only timbre matching is the use of identical chipboard on some of these speakers.
The centre in most cases is of a different size (hence volume), usually smaller than the L/R speakers. Therefore, according to the laws of physics its impossible for them to sound the same.
Sound in a smaller enclosure will ALWAYS sound different in a larger enclosure. End of argument.
Eric

Originally posted by uncle eric
Dave,What is an issue (and this is purely personal) is the use of the 773e for L/R and the 77c for centre. Even with the use of identical drivers throughout the front three, the volume differences with these are enormous. The 773e has 22 litres of volume while the 77c is one third of this at just over 7 litres.

What this means is that there is a huge mismatch in timbre with your front three. You should be able to spot this even with test tones. With dialogue and vocals this will be glaringly obvious and to some extent disturbing (to me anyway).
Try playing the same dialogue or vocals through each speaker in turn and you will see what I mean. The L/R's will have more body and substance in comparison to the much smaller centre.

You can also experiment by swapping over one of the mains with the centre whereby you will also see what you are missing in the middle.
Eric


Other reasons why someone might not use a centre speaker.

1) Asthetics.....yet another box in the room.
2) No where to put it. In many cases this is easily solved.
3) They have a projector and screen. The screen chosen has too much drop to enable them to place the centre channel speaker at the same height as the main L/R hence would mean a much lower centre channel which would have a derogatory effect on the front overall soundstage. For example, a 7ft wide (generally the most common size used) 1:33-1 (or 4x3 screen) would mean a drop of 63 inches. A quality screen like Stewart Filmscreens usually has a black drop of around 12 inches add at the top. There is another 3 inches at the bottom taken up by masking and bar combined. Nearly forgot. The housing of the screen is approx 4 inches high. Assuming this is placed on the ceiling the total drop would now be 82 inches. With the average ceiling height being 8ft, this would only leave a space of 14 inches. This is impossibly short for a floorstander or even a stand mounted bookcase speaker. Of course a 1:78-1 (16x9) screen would be preferable and would leave a space of just over 17" for your centre speaker. This is a little better but not much.
The way around this of course is to lose a little of the rooms length, and place a perferated screen in front of the speaker/speakers. However, this is not my cup of tea as IMO this is opening up anther can of worms. No matter what
EQ is used (or backwards correction as I like to call it), sound quality is affected. Loss of brightness of 10-15% on CRT PJ's is also unacceptable (to me anyway).
As for using single lense devices, many of these also can't cope with the perfs due to the fact that their pixels clash with the holes hence producing anomalies such as moire problems for example.


Reasons one MUST choose to use the centre channel

In a discrete multi channel system, the centre channel is the most active >80hz speaker. Matrixing this into the left and right mains serves no purpose but to hinder system performance in a multidude of ways.
1) Firstly and most obviously, all things being equal, there will be less overall output. Think about this one. If you have five channels of say 100watts per channel producing a certain output, again, all things being equal, the overall output levels produced by your speakers would have been substantially reduced by losing that fifth channel. To achieve the same output, you would need to crank your amp further. This would be a case of Hello Mr Distortion as the more the dial is cranked the higher the distortion. You've heard the saying, "Theres no such thing as a free lunch"

Originally posted by Dom H
Center speakers impede clarity

I hope this was a tongue in cheek statment Dom. This is by far the most absurd thing I've ever read anywhere as the truth is quite the contrary. As for your comment regarding off axis listening.
99.9% of us listen off axis. In a dedicated room, sitting in the sweetspot brings huge rewards.
However, how many of us are in this position? Very few. Many of us use our living rooms as our HT room. If only two channels are used, those that sit (for example) nearer to the left main, percieve centrally placed (by the sound designers) sound such as most dialogue as being on the left of the front soundstage. This is because of their location and purely because there is no centre channel to "anchor" the dialogue etc to the centre of the front soundstage.
This "pull", or perception of pull of the centre channel to the side will happen every time wherever anyone sits. The only solution to this pull is the use of a centre channel to "anchor" dialogue and other information destined for this channel directly where its supposed to go.

I'm off for my dinner now. If I don't get my pudding, I'll come and write another few thousand words on why the use of a centre channel is imperative for a multi channel system.

Eric
 

buns

Banned
I wouldnt consider running my set up without my center. Although my front 3 are now identical in terms of cables stands, speaker itself and amplification, i used to have a center totally different from the rest of my system, it wasnt perfect, but it was better than routing the sound to my fronts (and my fronts are exceptional at sonic imaging!).

Although Dom seems happy with his set up, I agree totally with eric (well hes the pro after all!).

Ad
 
D

Dom H

Guest
Cheers Eric nice read.

What I meant to say was I find for sweet spot listening a phantom center has always sounded better to me. The loss of output isn't a problem.


In your opinion, for sweet spot listening, put these in order of preference (ignoring aesthetics/loss of output)


1. Mains + Dedicated Center
2. 3 Identical Mains
3. Phantom Center


Plus just to add even if I did sit off center I would still prefer a 'wonky' phantom center, the on screen visuals do help to drag the voices back to the screen anyway. <zips up flamesuit>
 

buns

Banned
This topic has made me think over my duck a l'orange........

Any system only needs a certain amount of information to fully describe it. In this instance, a certain number of speakers. Or the other route would be to design your system such that a given number of speakers will convey all info. I assume this is the way things are done. The speaker config is assumed constant by the sound engineers, then they put soun on which required all channels.

I find it totally illogical that any other situation would be true. The center channel has discrete information not contained within any channel, to my mind, mixing it into other discrete channel (the L&R) will result in a loss of information and accuracy, the sound wasnt designed to be output this way.

From my scientific way of thinking, i cannot believe no center to be better than a center.

Ad
 
D

Dom H

Guest
The center channel has discrete information not contained within any channel, to my mind, mixing it into other discrete channel (the L&R) will result in a loss of information and accuracy, the sound wasnt designed to be output this way.
Playing an equal sound from each main speaker to create a central image is no different (as far as I know) from playing the sound from a center speaker.

You only need 2 speakers to create a soundstage. Sitting off center screws this up, hence the need for an exta central speaker.

If you think about it (waits for eric to dive in) sitting off center even with a center speaker will give incorrect imaging, a phantom image is still being created between each main and the center.
 
U

uncle eric

Guest
Originally posted by Dom H
If you think about it (waits for eric to dive in) sitting off center even with a center speaker will give incorrect imaging, a phantom image is still being created between each main and the center.
Not really Dom, because as I say, the info heavy centre (depending on the mix, sometimes as much as 50% of all sonics) pretty much "nails" the centre channel info there no matter where you sit. Its not like a "stereo pair" for example whereby the soundstage is drastically altered once you're out of the sweetspot. Anyway, I've had my pudding so I'll shut up now :D
Oh, the answer to your question is 3 identical mains. Of course, identical speakers all around are even better. When I can spare half an hour, I'll have a stab at explaining why I'm not a di-pole person in the thread that I started re di-poles.
Eric
 

buns

Banned
Was pudding nice!? :D

I think Dom is right, to a point, then i disagree.

2 speakers are needed to creat a soundstage, but it is bascally a one dimensional stage since it exists corrctly only at the sweetspot. Now, it is a fairly well accepted idea that the addition of an additional co-ordinate within a physical system will allow the description of another dimension. The centre channel is effectively this. Hence a soundstage on 2 dimensions as eric says.

This is a fairly analogy full idea, but it seems good to me! It would follow from it that 3 front and 3 rear should properly be able to describe the sound on a plane for both front and rear info.

Dunno if its right, but its an interesting thought!

ad
 

The latest video from AVForums

Oculus Quest 2 VR headset + Rotel A14 MkII Amp Reviews & Best of the Month
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Sky to add NBCUniversal's Peacock service
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bang & Olufsen announces Beoplay EQ TWS earphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 28th July 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Sky drops Sky One brand and introduces Showcase and Max
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cleer Audio announces Roam NC, affordable TWS earbuds
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom