JBL Synthesis Owner's Thread

Saul Goodman

Distinguished Member
Hi Drew
MLP to screen is 4 meters so a 10 foot wide screen is around the 42 deg recommended field of view, any wider would be uncomfortable

I experimented with a 10 foot wide scope screen mock-up but I didn't like having to keep changing projector memories
10 feet wide 16.9 works fine for me even with black bars top and bottom

Looking through some threads a lot of members went for 2.40:1 then eventually went back to 16.9

ah ok, yes always best to experiment. I am 3m away from a 10ft wide scope and find it to be perfec. Think I would go for a 4m wide scope if I was in your position though, but it is as always personal preference.

My preference is CIH, unmasked grey bars on left and right of 16:9 don’t bother me but grey bars top and bottom would. Zooming in and out with my JVC presets is super easy.
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Hi Drew
MLP to screen is 4 meters so a 10 foot wide screen is around the 42 deg recommended field of view, any wider would be uncomfortable

I experimented with a 10 foot wide scope screen mock-up but I didn't like having to keep changing projector memories
10 feet wide 16.9 works fine for me even with black bars top and bottom

Looking through some threads a lot of members went for 2.40:1 then eventually went back to 16.9

My preference is CIH, unmasked grey bars on left and right of 16:9 don’t bother me but grey bars top and bottom would. Zooming in and out with my JVC presets is super easy.

Hi Les,

CIH is meant to be the way/ industry standard that content should be presented: scope should be wider and more epic than any other format besides IMAX. But have you thought about CIA/ constant image area? It's a good compromise to CIH, With CIA scope will still be a little wider and 16:9 a little smaller, closer to the presentation as intended. You won't be as overwhelmed by 16:9 content, either. I really liked CIA in my tests.

You could always DIY magnetic masking panels as a fairly easy option - it's something on my list to try.

As I mentioned earlier, I decided to stick with 16:9 for now. I also like to play non competitive games on the big screen and I watch a lot of 16:9 and 1.85:1 content/ films in my home cinema, too - some of my favourite films are in 1.85:1, and I couldn't give up seeing the likes of my favourite film, Jurassic Park on a larger screen. I also liked the idea of just getting the biggest screen I could to play with the image as I please and see what I can do with masking. I got so used to the flexibility of projecting on my wall for so many years you see.

Regarding lots of members going back from 2.40:1 to 16:9 eventually, ultimately, I wouldn't go by what anyone else has done/ does and just go from your own experience, it's always the very best way. Feel free to PM me to discuss it if you like, I did a lot of tests with various screen/ image formats recently.
 

Lesmor

Distinguished Member
Hi Les,

CIH is meant to be the way/ industry standard that content should be presented: scope should be wider and more epic than any other format besides IMAX. But have you thought about CIA/ constant image area? It's a good compromise to CIH, With CIA scope will still be a little wider and 16:9 a little smaller, closer to the presentation as intended. You won't be as overwhelmed by 16:9 content, either. I really liked CIA in my tests.

You could always DIY magnetic masking panels as a fairly easy option - it's something on my list to try.

As I mentioned earlier, I decided to stick with 16:9 for now. I also like to play non competitive games on the big screen and I watch a lot of 16:9 and 1.85:1 content/ films in my home cinema, too - some of my favourite films are in 1.85:1, and I couldn't give up seeing the likes of my favourite film, Jurassic Park on a larger screen. I also liked the idea of just getting the biggest screen I could to play with the image as I please and see what I can do with masking. I got so used to the flexibility of projecting on my wall for so many years you see.

Regarding lots of members going back from 2.40:1 to 16:9 eventually, ultimately, I wouldn't go by what anyone else has done/ does and just go from your own experience, it's always the very best way. Feel free to PM me to discuss it if you like, I did a lot of tests with various screen/ image formats recently.
Yeah my OP has definitely gone OT
I will drop you a PM tomorrow
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Good evening @mb3195,

Something is wrong - I've just connected everything up finally to a Yamaha A3070. I've followed the SAM12X online manual and turned the dial on each crossover counter clockwise.

All I am getting is very low and tinny sound from all 3 SAM1HF. No sound from any of the woofers/ SAM2LF.

Do you have any ideas what might be wrong?

Kind thanks,

fallinlight
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Got it now, I compared my dials with alien's and mine were too far turned left. They're on now.
 

Smurfin

Distinguished Member
Hi Les,

CIH is meant to be the way/ industry standard that content should be presented: scope should be wider and more epic than any other format besides IMAX. But have you thought about CIA/ constant image area? It's a good compromise to CIH, With CIA scope will still be a little wider and 16:9 a little smaller, closer to the presentation as intended. You won't be as overwhelmed by 16:9 content, either. I really liked CIA in my tests.

You could always DIY magnetic masking panels as a fairly easy option - it's something on my list to try.

As I mentioned earlier, I decided to stick with 16:9 for now. I also like to play non competitive games on the big screen and I watch a lot of 16:9 and 1.85:1 content/ films in my home cinema, too - some of my favourite films are in 1.85:1, and I couldn't give up seeing the likes of my favourite film, Jurassic Park on a larger screen. I also liked the idea of just getting the biggest screen I could to play with the image as I please and see what I can do with masking. I got so used to the flexibility of projecting on my wall for so many years you see.

Regarding lots of members going back from 2.40:1 to 16:9 eventually, ultimately, I wouldn't go by what anyone else has done/ does and just go from your own experience, it's always the very best way. Feel free to PM me to discuss it if you like, I did a lot of tests with various screen/ image formats recently.

Although I prefer CIH, I went for CIW this time with horizontal masking panels. Doesn't help that my room is a single garage to my 16:9 diagonal is only 101"...but I want the biggest presentation possible for all formats. Ultimately so long as the screen is masked properly, imho it doesn't matter what route you go...
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Well Rajiv.... we are waiting....how do they sound? :)

Hey Drew,

Sorry, I thought I posted my initial impression on here, but had sent it to a friend instead.

I haven't EQ'd or got carpet down, its still just floorboards. I can't really make any true judgements with the state of my room and due to my ill-health I simply cannot do as much as I would like at all. I ran quick tests without my subs, running LR and LCR full range.

I think the JBL SAM 1HF/ 2LF are phenomenal sounding speakers. I couldn't listen loud at all yesterday, especially with no carpet. However, I listened to two go to favourite songs first, Beat It by Michael Jackson and Reckoner by Radiohead - ;) - two master track and album productions. My immediate impressions were how impressed I was by the SAMs balance/ flatness, clarity, poise/ control and tightness. I also quickly realised how loud they can go. There appear to sound more effortless than my old 3677. They sound cleaner and perhaps more clinical in tone than the 3677, which I was missing the warmth of a bit. But again, I can't compare anything accurately mainly due to the room condition and that may be due to that.

I then tested a few of my go to scenes from Man of Steel, Blade Runner, Blade Runner 2049 and Jurassic Park. All sounded great. Sound filled the room easily. One of the things I had expected from the SAMs was a balance of best of the M6 and 3677. And that is exactly what I felt: there was definitely the presence of detail across the frequency range, which I found lacking very much with the 3677, in comparison to my M6. High end detail was superb and the mid-range hit more like my M6. I was very impressed with the lower mid-range and low end capability of the SAMs. I heard a lot of sounds and detail that I've never heard before with either my 3677 or M6.

I'm impressed by how good the centre channel sounds so low. But that stand and 6.5 degree tilt is certainly helping a lot. It's not ideal but works very well, considering that there is no carpet and there was no EQ. The biggest negative are L and R being either side of the screen. As I had gotten used to how much better my 3677 sounded beneath the screen, closer matching an AT experience. So, I'm going to get some more ISO-155 stands and try LCR beneath my screen next. But it's certainly doable for now. I know this is not the best the SAMs can sound by far due to their compromised placement and current room conditions, so it's even more impressive when considering that.

I might do some more listening today, but it means carrying my very heavy PC up and down between rooms.

It's really nice having such nice speakers back in the room as it's been a short while since I have had any in action with an AVR, apart from my trusty little digital mirco monitors, the Edirol MA-10D.

Rajiv
 

Lesmor

Distinguished Member
I need to see if I can get a demo of JBL Synthesis SCL-6 speakers somewhere

@Smurfin
whether it is the right or wrong choice my 138" 16.9 Grandview screen arrives today
top and bottom black bars don't annoy me so the ratio can just change to whatever it wants
but it has been a difficult decision between this and a 130" 2.35

A rod for my own back as it looks like I will need to build a baffle wall for the centre speaker
 

Topmetom 2

Distinguished Member
I need to see if I can get a demo of JBL Synthesis SCL-6 speakers somewhere

@Smurfin
whether it is the right or wrong choice my 138" 16.9 Grandview screen arrives today
top and bottom black bars don't annoy me so the ratio can just change to whatever it wants
but it has been a difficult decision between this and a 130" 2.35

A rod for my own back as it looks like I will need to build a baffle wall for the centre speaker
I think karma av has a demo room with the jbl in? Could ask @Yorkshire AV or @AmericanAudio
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
might be an option I suppose hanging them off the wall would give me some idea

As long as they are elevated to the correct height, that should suffice. You could lean them against your wall, ideally with some foam behind it. I know some dealers do home demos, so it's worth asking, especially given the circumstances we are all in.
 

Lesmor

Distinguished Member
Spoke to my dealer he can arrange a demo at the York distributor

@Topetom 2
Could you pop round just now and help me swap my screen over?
 

mossym

Distinguished Member
maybe a little off topic, but been reading the experiences of the synthesis owners on here with interest. then spotted a set up for sale close to me, out of curiosity does anyone know anything about the HT4V? presume they were a lower end set?
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Hey Drew,

Sorry, I thought I posted my initial impression on here, but had sent it to a friend instead.

I haven't EQ'd or got carpet down, its still just floorboards. I can't really make any true judgements with the state of my room and due to my ill-health I simply cannot do as much as I would like at all. I ran quick tests without my subs, running LR and LCR full range.

I think the JBL SAM 1HF/ 2LF are phenomenal sounding speakers. I couldn't listen loud at all yesterday, especially with no carpet. However, I listened to two go to favourite songs first, Beat It by Michael Jackson and Reckoner by Radiohead - ;) - two master track and album productions. My immediate impressions were how impressed I was by the SAMs balance/ flatness, clarity, poise/ control and tightness. I also quickly realised how loud they can go. There appear to sound more effortless than my old 3677. They sound cleaner and perhaps more clinical in tone than the 3677, which I was missing the warmth of a bit. But again, I can't compare anything accurately mainly due to the room condition and that may be due to that.

I then tested a few of my go to scenes from Man of Steel, Blade Runner, Blade Runner 2049 and Jurassic Park. All sounded great. Sound filled the room easily. One of the things I had expected from the SAMs was a balance of best of the M6 and 3677. And that is exactly what I felt: there was definitely the presence of detail across the frequency range, which I found lacking very much with the 3677, in comparison to my M6. High end detail was superb and the mid-range hit more like my M6. I was very impressed with the lower mid-range and low end capability of the SAMs. I heard a lot of sounds and detail that I've never heard before with either my 3677 or M6.

I'm impressed by how good the centre channel sounds so low. But that stand and 6.5 degree tilt is certainly helping a lot. It's not ideal but works very well, considering that there is no carpet and there was no EQ. The biggest negative are L and R being either side of the screen. As I had gotten used to how much better my 3677 sounded beneath the screen, closer matching an AT experience. So, I'm going to get some more ISO-155 stands and try LCR beneath my screen next. But it's certainly doable for now. I know this is not the best the SAMs can sound by far due to their compromised placement and current room conditions, so it's even more impressive when considering that.

I might do some more listening today, but it means carrying my very heavy PC up and down between rooms.

It's really nice having such nice speakers back in the room as it's been a short while since I have had any in action with an AVR, apart from my trusty little digital mirco monitors, the Edirol MA-10D.

Rajiv

Impressions - Part 2: thoughts on SAMs beneath screen VS elevated beside screen VS M6

Last night I got to a more in-depth comparison between the SAM L/ R on stands either side of screen, LCR beneath screen and M6 L/ R beside screen. Again, no EQ. I found that whilst there was more cohesion gained with the LCR beneath the screen and maybe slightly L/ R sounding less distracting/ obvious, the sound suffered too much as as result from being so low to the floor. The centre channel SAM still sounded impressively clear and crisp though on the ISO-155. Note that I didn't use baffle blocks to elevate 1HF for L & R (there a bit shorter than 2LF). The centre 1HF was elevated. I used more high density foam blocks for L & R and rubber door wedges to tilt them up. I know the ISO-155 would have helped them considerably, but the other issue was that the sound just sounded off from coming from so low. The 3677 worked so well on the floor and beneath the image due to their height and my low seating height at the time. I've accepted that I simply can't use the SAMs that way in a non-AT setup as I had originally hoped, the sacrifice to the quality of sound is too great for me.

With L/ R elevated beside screen, the soundstage came alive and the true qualities of the SAMs shone through. With the centre still beneath the screen and low, as a whole, the front soundstage was just fine. Separation was better though needing a bit more cohesion perhaps. With LCR below the screen, the combined width of both HF & LF modules mean that they are close to each other. It took a while getting used to having the majority of sound come from either side of the screen again, but after about 1 hour, I was quite used to it again. Stereo music was bliss and I was more immersed in films.

I decided to hook up my M6 L and R, with centre SAM still on for films, to see just how much my impressions were correct about the SAMs combining the best of what I love about the M6 and 3677. Do the SAMs really have the high end detail of the M6 that was missing from the 3677? I was positively surprised to hear that I was spot on: The SAMs really shone through, producing maybe even more detail than the M6. Surprisingly though, the M6 still sounded like they had the SAMs beaten, as it did the 3677, in the low mid-range detail. For example, the rolling thunder in the back ground during the scene in Blade Runner (1982) before Rachel sits down to play the piano was more defined and detailed form the M6. Like the 3677, the SAMs sounded softer here. Another area where I was again impressed by the M6, was its mid-range bite and tightness. My go to track for this is Trivium's Shogun which features a classic mid-range heavy components typical of metal music. The guitars cut through tightly just as I remember the M6 to always re-produce them. Whilst on the SAMs, like the 3677, they sounded softer and looser, not bad by any means, however. And this is where I tend to come back to saying that for critical monitoring and music listening, the M6 had the 3677 beat easily. Another example of the tight mid range of the M6 is the docking scene in Interstellar and opening sequence in Blade Runner 2049, I was always more immersed and 'locked-in' to the sound and overall experience in these scenes due to this. I wasn't able to test these scenes with the SAMs on this occasion, however. Listening to my M6 again after all this time, I was also reminded of how thin and small a sound they put out compared to a speaker like the SAM 1HF/ 2LF. One thing I was constantly thinking was if the SAMs were worth it for my needs and room, and it was moments like these in which the improvement and performance of the SAMs reassured me that it was, at least for the most part.

Switching over to Van Morrison's Caravan off of Moondance, I was very impressed by how much of the M6s qualities the SAM had that I had longed for along with the 3677s warmth and much fuller sound. Caravan was the song that really awakened me to the potential of the M6 as stereo music speakers in my final a/ b tests with my old 3677. But now, the M6 were finally beat by the SAMs. The SAMs re-produced a warmth and fullness to the guitars and saxophone as well as the clarity and realism of the playing and sound itself that was a pure pleasure to hear. Instrument separation was superb between L & R and considerably better than my 3677, from what I can remember.

The same warmth, clarity and fullness of sound shone through during the end credit sequence in Jurassic Park (1993), a sequence that I love to immerse and lull myself in, alongside the sleepy, warm soft orange-yellow hue of the image. The sparkle of the high end and conviction of rolling drums and crescendos were fabulous. However, I didn't get the same room filling sound as I did from the 3677. I did expect this to be the likely case with the SAMs, though. My go to sequence for this test is the scene in which John Hammond steps out of the helicopter as him and his company first arrive in the Park. The swelling of the classic theme really filled my room from the 3677

Going back to the issue of sound not being married to the on-screen action in a non-AT setup, the opening scene of Jurassic Park I find is always a good test. There are bustling plant leaves which sway between left and right speakers, and the raptor in its cage which comes into shot from the right speaker. I concluded that in the case of the SAMs, these sound placement itself was maybe as much an issue with LCR beneath the screen as it was with L & R beside the screen, again, for the reasons mentioned earlier. That said, the immersion from the superior quality of sound overall with L & R beside screen helped draw me into the experience that much more to the point where my brain was able to put two and 2 - sound and image - together well enough.

Finally, I can't imagine a smaller centre/ centre/ speaker that can work horizontally being much better if at all, than the SAMs, regardless of their size and how low I have it. That said, I am keeping myself open to anything like the SAMs that might be smaller and thus work better in my room. But having said that, if I do go with an AT setup in the future, the SAMs would be perfect.

In conclusion, at least for now, for those that were interested in buying the SAMs/ centre from me, I'm quite confident that I will be keeping the them for now based on my tests. However, there was a JBL/ Synthesis range that I remember seeing recently that had a centre that could be placed horizontally, and I was thinking that it might work better for me. But the SAMs current placement and superb performance, though compromised, sounds excellent to me and will only sound even better once the room is furnished and with acoustic treatment. If I do have a change of mind and heart however, you'll all know for sure!

Wishing everyone a very Merry Christmas,

Rajiv
 
Last edited:

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
Impressions - Part 2: thoughts on SAMs beneath screen VS elevated beside screen VS M6

Last night I got to a more in-depth comparison between the SAM L/ R on stands either side of screen, LCR beneath screen and M6 L/ R beside screen. Again, no EQ. I found that whilst there was more cohesion gained with the LCR beneath the screen and maybe slightly L/ R sounding less distracting/ obvious, the sound suffered too much as as result from being so low to the floor. The centre channel SAM still sounded impressively clear and crisp though on the ISO-155. Note that I didn't use baffle blocks to elevate 1HF for L & R (there a bit shorter than 2LF). The centre 1HF was elevated. I used more high density foam blocks for L & R and rubber door wedges to tilt them up. I know the ISO-155 would have helped them considerably, but the other issue was that the sound just sounded off from coming from so low. The 3677 worked so well on the floor and beneath the image due to their height and my low seating height at the time. I've accepted that I simply can't use the SAMs that way in a non-AT setup as I had originally hoped, the sacrifice to the quality of sound is too great for me.

With L/ R elevated beside screen, the soundstage came alive and the true qualities of the SAMs shone through. With the centre still beneath the screen and low, as a whole, the front soundstage was just fine. Separation was better though needing a bit more cohesion perhaps. With LCR below the screen, the combined width of both HF & LF modules mean that they are close to each other. It took a while getting used to having the majority of sound come from either side of the screen again, but after about 1 hour, I was quite used to it again. Stereo music was bliss and I was more immersed in films.

I decided to hook up my M6 to see just how much my impressions were correct about the SAMs combining the best of what I love about the M6 and 3677. Do the SAMs really have the high end detail of the M6 that was missing from the 3677? I was positively surprised to hear that I was spot on: The SAMs really shone through, producing maybe even more detail. Surprisingly though, the M6 still sounded like they had the JBLs beaten, as it did the 3677, in the low mid-range detail. For example, the rolling thunder in the back ground during the scene in Blade Runner (1982) before Rachel sits down to play the piano was more defined and detailed form the M6. Like the 3677, the SAMs sounded softer here. Another area where I was again impressed by the M6, was its mid-range bite and tightness. My go to track for this is Trivium's Shogun which features a classic mid-range heavy components typical of metal music. The guitars cut through tightly just as I remember the M6 to always re-produce them. Whilst on the SAMs, like the 3677, they sounded softer and looser, not bad by any means, however. And this is where I tend to come back to saying that for critical monitoring and music listening, the M6 had the 3677 beat easily. Another example of the tight mid range of the M6 is the docking scene in Interstellar and opening sequence in Blade Runner 2049, I was always more immersed and 'locked-in' to the sound and overall experience in these scenes due to this. I wasn't able to test these scenes with the SAMs on this occasion, however.

Switching over to Van Morrison's Caravan off of Moondance, I was very impressed by how much of the M6s qualities the SAM had that I had longed for along with the 3677s warmth and much fuller sound. Caravan was the song that really awakened me to the potential of the M6 as stereo music speakers in my final a/ b tests with my old 3677. But now, the M6 were finally beat by the SAMs. The SAMs re-produced a warmth and fullness to the guitars and saxophone as well as the clarity and realism of the playing and sound itself that was a pure pleasure to hear. Instrument separation was superb between L & R and considerably better than my 3677, from what I can remember.

The same warmth, clarity and fullness of sound shone through during the end credit sequence in Jurassic Park (1993), a sequence that I love to immerse and lull myself in, alongside the sleepy, warm soft orange-yellow hue of the image. The sparkle of the high end and conviction of rolling drums and crescendos were fabulous. However, I didn't get the same room filling sound as I did from the 3677. I did expect this to be the likely case with the SAMs, though. My go to sequence for this test is the scene in which John Hammond steps out of the helicopter as him and his company first arrive in the Park. The swelling of the classic theme really filled my room from the 3677

Going back to the issue of sound not being married to the on-screen action in a non-AT setup, the opening scene of Jurassic Park I find is always a good test. There are bustling plant leaves which sway between left and right speakers, and the raptor in its cage which comes into shot from the right speaker. I concluded that in the case of the SAMs, these sound placement itself was maybe as much an issue with LCR beneath the screen as it was with L & R beside the screen, again, for the reasons mentioned earlier. That said, the immersion from the superior quality of sound overall with L & R beside screen helped draw me into the experience that much more to the point where my brain was able to put two and 2 - sound and image - together well enough.

Finally, I can't imagine a smaller centre/ centre/ speaker that can work horizontally being much better if at all, than the SAMs, regardless of their size and how low I have it. That said, I am keeping myself open to anything like the SAMs that might be smaller and thus work better in my room. But having said that, if I do go with an AT setup in the future, the SAMs would be perfect.

In conclusion, at least for now, for those that were interested in buying the SAMs/ centre from me, I'm quite confident that I will be keeping the them for now based on my tests. However, there was a JBL/ Synthesis range that I remember seeing recently that had a centre that could be placed horizontally, and I was thinking that it might work better for me. But the SAMs current placement and superb performance, though compromised, sounds excellent to me and will only sound even better once the room is furnished and with acoustic treatment. If I do have a change of mind and heart however, you'll all know for sure!

Wishing everyone a very Merry Christmas,

Rajiv

I forgot to add that I did EQ quickly for LCR beneath my screen using YPAO on my A3070, using 1 mic position. The result sounded quite terrible, thin, lacking mids and the high end sounding overly boosted. I've found YPAO to be temperamental with results in the past, so it may be that but also likely the state of my unfurnished room having an effect. I did all my tests with no EQ, which sounded better overall. A good and proper room EQ system such as Dirac would be beneficial, and could allow LCR to work better beneath my screen. I settled for the trusty A3070 again as a stop-gap till I see what the state of receivers are next year.
 

fallinlight

Distinguished Member
I did a lot more testing today as the sound just wasn't sitting right with me and I felt I could get it better, which I did. The last thing I did was to raise the centre by approx. 20 cm helped a lot. And now at least all woofers are at about the same height. I also tried LCR beneath my screen at this higher height which sounded very nice. It was a fuller and more cohesive sound but many sounds, especially isolated sounds and isolated bits of dialogue drew attention to themselves. A good example is the scene in Blade Runner 2049 in which the pleasure model A.I talks out of shot once or twice and is also heard from the far left. With the left speaker beside my screen, the dialogue placement is better than bottom left, beneath the screen. Another good example is the Gallimimus flocking scene in Jurassic Park. Again, the rush of dinosaurs squealing and rush of heavy footsteps occupies the width of the screen and thus worked better with the image for me with L and R beside the screen.

I realised that I still like CIH, and found myself preferring it over CIW today. Utilising CIH allowed me to keep the centre raised. 16:9 and 1.85:1 content incurs too much neck strain and a poor viewing angle at the full width of my screen. But using CIH worked a charm. The extra brightness gained along with the better sharpness and overall better image quality, especially for 4K upscaled HD content (Jurassic Park 3D in this instance), was astonishing. It really drew my eyes to how - I read this - the image at max zoom suffers. My like for CIH also brings getting an A lens back into the mix as I really saw how the extra brightness would help scope content here.

The first thing I did today was actually put LCR up in vertical orientation as they would be behind an AT screen. I let content run as normal on my screen behind. It was great to hear them like this, they sounded perfect. After this I decided to put my screen in front of L and R to see if my thoughts about an AT screen would change. It was quite a transformative experience. The proper placement of the sound of rustling leaves in the opening sequence of Jurassic Park this time added a depth to the image and scene that was not there previously. I had never experienced this before. In some regards, I felt that there was not much difference to having the speakers as above, either side and centre below my screen. But as a whole, the improvement in sound and the on-screen action was obvious. Man of Steel's opening sequence of Krypton coming to its end was spectacular. It's a great example of the sound of action panning between L, C and R and the great musical score. Because of this, I think this scene really showcases when all 3 front speakers are set up well, especially optimally. At this stage in my tests I realised that I made the right move getting the largest budget 16:9 screen I could fit because as planned, it has allowed me to play with the image and speaker placement in a very beneficial way. For example, I was also able to get a far closer AT setup impression using my non-AT screen , despite the sound suffering from being blocked by the PVC. I had previously hung wrinkly bed sheets as taught as possible over my speakers. The better mock-up felt a lot more comfortable than before, although, I do still prefer the longer seating and viewing distance to the non-AT screen. That said, I've now get a clearer plan in mind, which is to see how I go enjoying a non-AT CIH setup. But I feel more inclined now to do this with an AT screen at some point after todays tests.

Finally, my best friend and a fellow AVF member sent me some snippets of new songs he is working on using his new interface and software. I had recently heard how good they were sounding on my PC monitor downstairs. But I was blown away when I first heard them through proper speakers. I have never heard sound so clear and of such high fidelity. I put that down to his musicianship and skill, his new hardware and software, and these glorious speakers.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Panasonic LZ2000, LZ1500 & LZ980 Hands-on Launch Event | No QD-OLED for 2022, new 77-inch for LZ2000
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

What's new on Netflix UK for June 2022
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Triangle announces new wireless Borea Active bookshelf speakers
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Cleer Audio announces Arc earbuds
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
iFi Audio launches new Go bar portable DAC/headphone amp
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Sony adds LinkBuds S to its earphone series
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom