Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Surround help

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    22

    Default Surround help

    So a little surround help needed here.
    I Currently own an Onkyo 818 and planning tower and horizon for front stage (nRt).

    I was thinking of buying 200s for the side and back surrounds but the 170 interest me a lot. However I do not think the WAF would fly with the 170 and having them mounted a few inches away from the wall.

    First question: Which would be better for side and back surrounds, 170s or 200s, or does it matter because the difference is minor for sides/backs?

    Second question: Regardless which I pick, the back surrounds have to go up on the kitchen cabinets which opens up behind the listening area. Is having the speakers up at 8' in 9' ceiling room cause any issues? Or is it not worth the extra effort? I would rather set up 7.1 now rather than 5.1 and adding later.

    Thanks!
    TA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    578

    Default Re: Surround help

    Hi TA,

    I went through the same process earlier this year regarding either 200s or 170s for side/back surrounds. My listening room is very small (12.5' W, 10' L, 8.25' H), but I wanted a 7.1 configuration to take advantage of discrete eight channel mixes from BD formats. Ultimately, I went with 200s instead of 170s for specific reasons:

    - Size/Aesthetics: while I don't have WAF to consider, the 170s are MUCH larger than the 200s. It would have been extremely difficult to fit four 170s in this room without being a major eyesore, not to mention difficulty with placement. I cannot mount anything to the walls, so the side surrounds need to be on stands at ~5 feet high and the back surrounds need to be on shelves at ~5 feet high. The 200s allowed me to easily accommodate the requirements for optimal placement. I don't have to worry about the weight of the 170s on the small stands (e.g. tip hazard). The 200s also improve aesthetics and appearance due to their small size.

    - Sealed design: the 200s allowed more flexible placement options without the usual concern of ported enclosures. The 200s are extremely close to the rear wall and this would not provide adequate clearance for 170s. I'm also a fan of acoustic suspension designs for several reasons.

    - Sound quality: the 200s were close enough to the 170s that I didn't feel like I was giving up too much. To my ears, the 170s do have deeper bass extension and are more full-bodied (understandably), but that's about it. The mid/high-frequency response was nearly identical. The 200s have excellent transient response and sound fantastic overall. I really enjoyed listening to these when I had them set up in a 2-channel configuration in my bedroom. Now I enjoy them for surrounds and I use the pair of 170s for my bedroom. Very happy.


    OK, now some feedback on specific questions.

    Quote Originally Posted by atcjeep View Post
    First question: Which would be better for side and back surrounds, 170s or 200s, or does it matter because the difference is minor for sides/backs?
    Hopefully my info above helps to answer this question. Honestly, I think you'll be happy with either when it comes to sound quality.

    For movies, the bass extension on 170s becomes less of an advantage if you run a crossover (e.g. 80 Hz). When Dave designed the HTM-200 SE, one of the things he aimed for was a seamless crossover at 80 Hz (the older HTM-200 model did not extend as low and thus required a higher crossover).

    For multichannel music with an 80 Hz crossover, I still think the 200s hold their own. However, if full-range multichannel music (SACD, etc.) is something you want, then I would give the nod to the 170s for their deeper extension. But like I said, if you plan to use a crossover with your surrounds, I think the 200s will be absolutely fine. They trade some bass and mid-bass output for a smaller profile, less weight, and flexible placement options. These attributes make the 200s well worth the consideration.

    In addition, I recommend you choose either four 200s or four 170s rather than two of each. Having four identical speakers for sides/back will ensure that the surround effects, panning, and soundfields are completely seamless. I use four 200s and have absolutely no complaints.

    Quote Originally Posted by atcjeep View Post
    Second question: Regardless which I pick, the back surrounds have to go up on the kitchen cabinets which opens up behind the listening area. Is having the speakers up at 8' in 9' ceiling room cause any issues? Or is it not worth the extra effort? I would rather set up 7.1 now rather than 5.1 and adding later.
    If you're wanting to enjoy 7.1 Blu-ray titles, then I think you should go for the full 7.1 experience. That said, I don't think that 8 or 9 feet high is too much. The 200s have wide dispersion and will easily fill that space. I really don't think you'll have a problem. I do, however, recommend you aim them downward into the listening area.

    I've tried surround speakers at ear level, and I actually prefer the surrounds to be above the listener. It is much less distracting that way. As mentioned previously, I have my surrounds at just over 5 feet high, so when I'm sitting down, they are about 1-2 feet above my head. When the surrounds were ear level, I found them very distracting since they were only 2 feet away. Sometimes the surround effects were too overpowering. However, when I elevated the side and back surrounds, I was very pleased. The effects are more enveloping and less locatable. It's like your local theater--the surround speakers are placed up high, but aimed down. I took this approach in my listening room with great success. I have them angled downward by 8 degrees using two Auralux MoPads per speaker. This is the best it's ever sounded.

    With your proposed placement, I think 8-9 feet high is fine, just angle them down a bit using MoPads or some other method.

    Good luck and let me know if you have any more questions.


    EDIT: If you really want to give the 170s a try, go for it. Ascend has a 30-day trial period. You can purchase one set of 200s and one set of 170s and see which you like better for SQ, WAF, etc. Then, purchase a second set of the keepers and send the other pair back. That way you won't have to wonder about either of them.
    Last edited by Dark Ranger; 12-27-2012 at 05:36 PM.
    -Jacob

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •