170SE or 200's for surround

[dbart]

Seeing that the 170 is rear ported and the 200's are sealed, which would be the better choice for wall mountable surrounds?

[sensibull]

Please don't take this the wrong way, but this topic has been covered many times already. Doing a search may net you a significantly more comprehensive answer, but the consensus seems to be, go with the 200s if you a) want to truly "wall-mount" them, meaning flush against the wall, b) want a surround with a smaller aesthetic impact. Conversely, go with the 170s if you a) listen to multi-channel music, or b) want and/or need a higher-quality speaker as your surround. The 170 is the better speaker overall (greater range and extension), but it requires some space behind it (3-4" minimum) and is significantly larger and heavier, demanding a quality mount attached to a wall-stud.

Hope that helps.

[dbart]

Thats it in a nutshell, thanks Sensibull

[GaryB]

While sensibull didn't imply otherwise, I think it should be re-iterated that the HTM-200 is an excellent little speaker, perfectly-suited for surround use. As long as you're using it with a sub, and employing an 80-100 Hz crossover, the gains by moving up to a CBM-170SE surround will be subtle at best, even for multi-channel music.

The CBM is considerably more capable as a front-channel speaker, of course, especially if used full-range.