CBM-170s or HTM-200s for side/rear surround?

[la3288]

I have a pair of CBM and HTMs for side and rear surround in a 7.1 setup ( 170 L/R, 340 C), but I've been trying to decide which is best for side surround and rear surround.

Originally my idea was to put the HTMs as my sides and CBMs in the rear, but looking at old threads, I've seen people do the opposite by putting the CBMs on the side and HTMs as rear.

Are the HTMs "better" as rear surrounds vs side in this application?

[N Boros]

I have a pair of CBM and HTMs for side and rear surround in a 7.1 setup ( 170 L/R, 340 C), but I've been trying to decide which is best for side surround and rear surround.

Originally my idea was to put the HTMs as my sides and CBMs in the rear, but looking at old threads, I've seen people do the opposite by putting the CBMs on the side and HTMs as rear.

Are the HTMs "better" as rear surrounds vs side in this application?

All of the speakers in the SE series would integrate well with each other. That said, if you plan to wall mount, the HTM 200's are easier to wall mount, especially if you want a flush mount, since you don't have to worry about the rear port, like with the CBM 170's. If it were me, I would stick with the HTM 200's if you plan to wall mount. If you plan to put them on speaker stands, then go with the CBM 170's. I wouldn't use the CMT 340's in the surround or surround back positions unless you are really far away from them, like 15 to 20 feet or more. This shouldn't be the case for most people.

[SunByrne]

In all honesty, if you're running a sub, I'd get HTM-200s over CBM-170s for pretty much anything.

The 200s are smaller, lighter, easier to place, look better, are cheaper to ship, and sound better through most of the range. They're actually pretty amazing for the price; the drawback being the lack of bass. The only thing I think the 170s do better is bass impact/extension, which is basically addressed in any HT application where you have a good subwoofer.

I'd just get four HTM-200s and call it a day.

Err, wait... you already have them? Well, then, go with what you have. It will make little to no difference which set you put where, so I'd let convenience of setup drive you. As noted, the 200s are easier to wall mount, so if one set has to be wall mounted, use the 200s for that, regardless of whether that's side or rear.

[la3288]

Err, wait... you already have them? Well, then, go with what you have. It will make little to no difference which set you put where, so I'd let convenience of setup drive you. As noted, the 200s are easier to wall mount, so if one set has to be wall mounted, use the 200s for that, regardless of whether that's side or rear.

yes, they were given to me. I ended up putting the CBMs in the rear.

I agree though, probably best just to get HTMs all around for surround sound due to the reasons mentioned in this thread.

[N Boros]

yes, they were given to me. I ended up putting the CBMs in the rear.

I agree though, probably best just to get HTMs all around for surround sound due to the reasons mentioned in this thread.

When I originally read your post, I thought you were looking to purchase some of these speakers. If you already have cbm 170s for fronts, cmt 340s as a center, HTM 200s and cbm 170s as side and rear surrounds, then I wouldn’t purchase anything. Just get wall mounts and/or speaker stands to place your side and rear surrounds, using the Dolby guidelines. I don’t think it would be worth spending any money to swap out some of the speakers with HTM 200s.