200s vs. 170s vs. 340s

This may be a totally subjective question, but if there are any objective facts, this should be the forum to find out!

I'm going to have a small, (13ft wide x 16ft long x 8ft high) room in my new house for a home theater. It will have a door, so it can be totally sealed. So that's only about 1700 cubic feet.

I plan on using a nice Infinite Baffle subwoofer to handle the 80hz and below sound.

So my question is this: Since the HTM-200s can go down to 80hz, is there any advantage to getting CBM-170s or CMT-340s? Right now, I'm under the assumption that the sound between 80hz-20khz is the same or close to it on all three of these. :confused:

There are differences and I think most agree that the difference between 200 and 170 is greater than the one between the 170 and 340, particularly for a smaller room. That, and the fact that the 170s only cost a bit more than 200s, lead me to generally recommend 170s across the front and 200s in the rear if you're looking to save money. This assumes that the size difference is not an issue. I'm sure there will be some other opinions too.

I'm with BradJudy. If you are trying to get the least expensive setup for your room I'd go with 170s across the front and 200s in the rear. If you wanted to spend a little more money get a 340 center, 170 left and right, 200 rears.

I guess I *am* looking at size as a consideration, which is why I'm looking at the HTM-200s. CSW http://tinyurl.com/68nuz has there MC200s which have almost identical specs to the HTM. Probably a good idea to get a pair of each and try them out, huh?

If anyone knows of any other small, wall mountable speakers that go down to 80hz and cost less than $150 each, let me know. I think the Onyx ELTs might fill the bill too.

I'm going to have to live with these for a long time, so I don't mind spending a little time and money trying them out! :D

Also, I read somewhere that Dr. Hsu (you know, the guy who builds some decent subwoofers) prefers the HTM-200s over the CBM-170s. Something about the 200s being more "forward". :confused:

As you mentioned, the ELTs are another option. They are bigger than the 200s, but smaller than the 170s. You gain a wood finish (and a premium finish extra cost option) but you lose the mounting screw threads that the Ascends have. These trade-offs depend on your decor/tastes and how you wanted to mount them. If you're looking at using omnimount style mounts, the threaded holes are a definite plus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S_rangeBrew

Also, I read somewhere that Dr. Hsu (you know, the guy who builds some decent subwoofers) prefers the HTM-200s over the CBM-170s. Something about the 200s being more "forward". :confused:

---

Yup....this is true. I first demo'd Ascends at the Hsu facilities. Dr. Hsu prefers a more forward sound.

OK, I'll bite. What is "more forward sound"?

I dunno. Someone care to explain what more forward is? :confused:

Quote:

---

What is "more forward sound"?

---

Here is what I use to explain it... and this is using general terminology (there is no specific definition)

A "forward" sounding speaker tends to make the vocals sound like they are coming from a point dead center in between and in front of the speakers, or more defined as directly in front of you

A "laid back" speaker tends to make the vocals sound like they are coming from further away...

Another good explanation is imagine you are at a concert hall, a forward sounding speaker might make the presentation sound like you are in the first 10 rows... a more laid back speaker from a distance of maybe 50 rows back.

All of our loudspeakers are designed to present an accurate performance presentation such that the perceived distance of the singer in reference to the other performers is consistent with stage positioning and also how the recording engineering intended it to be heard.

Hope this helps!