Sierra-1 Nrt vs CMT-340 for DEDICATED Home theater [Archive]

j0nnyfive

07-30-2011, 11:05 PM

Tower

07-31-2011, 04:56 PM

if u like ascend speaker why don't you buy towers? u can paid 1300 for sierra 1 Nrt , 600$ more than you won't feel sorry in the futures? speakers last over 7 years ( 7 years warranty ).
i still have **** , definitive technology towers. when i bought them i thought i need speaker for movie and games only but i was wrong, think about how many good movie release every week ? can you watch old movie every night?.
After Projector, dual svs ultra 13 , room full treated.... every times i turn music on i cry ... cry because i was listen to movie speaker fan boy said that speakers good for movie will good for music :(
Never heard or own ascend speakers before but i count every day for my sierra towers, Dave don't let me down :D

RandomName

07-31-2011, 05:37 PM

Hello everybody on this forum who reads this!

If I'm breaking any forum rules by creating this thread or anything like that, I apologize. I'm not very experienced with forum posting. I've been reading for a while (weeks now), but I can't seem to find the answers and I was hoping that someone with experience could help me.

I have the Sierra-1 Nrt speakers sitting in my small apartment living room right now. They do sound exquisite. However.... and this is a really big, nagging, however for me... I have packed them back up and am ready to send them back... with a tear in my eye... ONLY because of their sensitivity. I originally believed that a speaker that could excel in music could EASILY excel with movies. I'm beginning to change my mind about this.

After weeks of researching this stuff, I've finally figured out that there tend to be 2 camps of people in all these speaker boards. The home theater people, and the music people. (I'm oversimplifying here I know, but just play along). Music people tend to say "These speakers are awesome, and they will work for home theater too!" Movie people tend to say "These speakers are awesome, and they will work for music too!"

Music People tend to value: Speakers having lots of frequency range and subtle clarity, imaging, etc.

Movie People tend to value: Lots of volume headroom (dynamic range?), clear dialogue, directivity(?)..

Anyway, as a newbie coming into this sound stuff, this distinction isn't very apparent at first because the 2 camps are both sorta acting like they know what's best for the other side. lol But it's only because everybody can only draw from their own personal tastes and experiences, I know, so it's all good.

As a newb.. I'm asking for advice from ANYBODY here. Even if you're fully into the music camp, or fully into the movie camp, or both. I'd like to just know your thoughts.

I'm wanting to buy 2 speakers that will eventually become my left and right mains for my home theater when I move into a house (unknown when). I want these speakers to not only have good sound quality, but also be able to reach "reference level" of... 105 db I think? But, without "strain" (in whatever sense that may be).

I'm more into home theater than music, so keep that in mind. Would the CMT-340 se's be up to the job? I am OPEN to the idea of keeping the Nrts if they can somehow work. But let me end this now by giving you my own personal PRO and CON style anecdote of the Sierra:

PRO: I was sitting in my little chair listening to some Clapton, and holy freaking ZOMG it sounded like he was standing in my room right between the speakers looking down at me. These speakers are INSANELY CLEAR. I have never experienced this before!

CON: I was watching Star Wars A New Hope, at 3:00 a.m. in my apartment with the volume turned OVER half way up on my receiver and I was in NO WAY afraid that it would wake the people living above me. This made me worry. I was like, how can it be this quiet with the volume of my Denon 3312ci turned over half way up? Cognitive Dissonance out the wazzoo here.

Thanks guys and gals! I really do appreciate any wisdom you can offer this newb. I am willing to learn whatever you are willing to teach! Thanks again.

-Jonathan

Well first off, honestly, if you think your 3312 is a powerful amp then you are crazy. (I have the same receiver) It's not a weak amp by any measure, but due to the way volume works, it takes a great deal of power to increase volume (the watts must double for each 3db increase)

That said, what volume level are you talking about 3312? because if you are literally talking about -30 - -40, then yes, your system is going to be extremely quiet.

I keep my 3312 at around -20 for videos, but if you don't think when you get up -10 or higher that it isn't extremely loud, then perhaps you have something wired wrong (I can't even bring myself to go past -5 because it's so obscenely loud)

Have you run audyssey? Are you sure you have configured the receiver to recognize it only has stereo speakers? What's the source you are using? Is it bitstreaming?

Also, how big is your room?

To be honest though, no bookshelf speakers will really have any risk of waking any neighbors at levels which are listenable comfortably. Only really low frequencies will pass through walls easily.

What it sounds like you really need is a subwoofer. That's the only way you are going to get that gut vibrating wake all of your neighbors sensation.

Now if you are really turning the volume of the 3312 up to -20 - 0 and it's still not loud enough for you, then the only way you are going to get the volume you are looking for is to get a power amp that can really push them. Keep in mind the Sierra's are rated up to 200w continuous, 400w peak. Your 3312 will never hit those power levels.

I've seen people using a pair of these:

http://emotiva.com/upa1.shtm

That's probably the CHEAPEST option to actually fully drive the speakers, other options would be NAD or Rotel.

Honestly I'm considering either:

http://emotiva.com/xpa2.shtm for 100 more, you get 300w per channel (headroom is your friend)

or

http://emotiva.com/xpa3.shtm for same price you get 3 channels so you have the expandability for a center channel though the power likely won't be quite as clean as a pair of monoblocks.

Sam1000

07-31-2011, 06:15 PM

Do you use subwoofer for movies? Consider crossing them over at 80htz with a good subwoofer like Rythmik.

choirbass

07-31-2011, 09:18 PM

I do second RandomNames' comments about the amplifier you're using not being sufficient enough for earbleeding spl, though you werent exactly asking for that lol. Not owning that particular amp myself, a quality amp will definitely open up your sierras nonetheless. To where your current concern should no longer be an issue at all.

j0nnyfive

07-31-2011, 10:44 PM

Wow everybody! Thanks for the timely response! I'm going to just respond to everyone at the same time here. (Just pretend I'm quoting everybody). lol I'm such a forum newb.

First of all let me tell you a little about me and about what I know and don't know. I'm "new" to this sound stuff, but I'm not without some basic knowledge.

RandomName, I may be crazy, but I do not in any way think the 3312ci is anywhere remotely powerful. ;) Even if my speaker needed 100 watts at some point in time, doubling that would only give me 3db more volume, quadrupling that would give 3db more, and so on, like you said.

To give you some context, my whole idea behind buying really high quality speakers was that I figured that as long as they were high quality, that would give me that whole "authentic" cinema experience that I crave. Part of that experience that I'm after is being able to hear the sound just as loud as I would in a commercial cinema. I did not realize until AFTER I purchased these beautiful little speakers (that I have finally decided to keep, btw), that a speaker that is deemed "high quality" would NOT necessarily be designed for that type of volume output. I figured that it wouldn't have to be as big as a cinema speaker simply because I would be sitting so much closer to it.
Well... I was only partly right.

I just recently learned that a cinema speaker should be able to play such that the listening position can receive sound at a maximum of 105db from each speaker. Probably higher for subs, not sure. Now notice I said maximum, not all the time. So for the loudest bangs and whatnot, 105db should be achievable CLEANLY. No compression or symptoms of the speaker straining in any way.

To my understanding, this requires not only power, but a speaker with a very high efficiency/sensitivity that is designed for this type of use. Most home speakers are NOT designed for this type of use. Most SANE speakers are not designed for this type of use. lol

I'm not sane. :p

Ran Audyssey. I think I prefer Audyssey flat without dynamic equalizer or dynamic volume. Set speakers to large, stereo, recognizing only my two speakers.

I think you did answer some of my questions tho concerning how loud the receiver should be set at. Yes, at -20 is about where I put the volume. I was startled that this is what it took. It does sound very nice at this volume, and I think I've decided that this is all I need because of my apartment living situation.

Sam1000, although I would love to be able to use a sub, my apartment living situation prevents this. The Sierras have plenty of bass for me in this small room. :) The reason I was concerned about volume being too low was because I wanted to invest in a pair of speakers that I would eventually use as my two fronts in my future home theater. For this apartment, the volume is more than enough, and so is the bass.

Tower, lol I like the name. The reason I didn't buy the tower is because I don't think I would feel comfortable purchasing a third tower to use as a center or even the center channel. I'm not made of money. :p I plan on using an acoustically transparent screen with 3 identical speakers behind it, in the future.

choirbass, I think getting amps in the future may be a pretty good idea.

Here is my current solution.. my theory..

1. Keep the Sierras (which I have decided to do) because of their capabilities of clarity, neutrality, and extension at "sane" volume. At least I have a pair of really nice music speaker as well! They have that "totality" in one speaker that music lovers tend to crave, and I really think this is a nice thing too. They give plenty of sparkly highs and incredible lows for this small space. I don't plan on buying surrounds for this apartment because I simply can't find a place to mount them. It's a weird living room setup. Very small as well.

2. In the future when I am not restricted by volume and bass limitations, I'm going to get my hands on some obnoxious speakers rated at least 97db sensitive and put them all around. I don't believe these speakers will have the qualities that the Sierra does (no easy feat), but they will be designed for high volume with plenty of headroom. They WILL require subs so I will get those too.

But, this is where I am right now. Anyone have experience with highly "dynamic" speakers? Horns, waveguides, whatnot? I'm wondering if anyone here has experience in this arena. I'm sure Dave probably knows a lot, and I would love to hear his take as well! You may wonder why I'm not simply asking OTHER forums this question is because I'm trying to establish some context. I'd like to hear from Ascend owners who ALSO dabble in super dynamic speakers as well. Comparisons, issues, concerns, experiences, opinions, ideas, whatnot.

For anybody who reads this: If you are on the fence about purchasing the Sierra-1 or Sierra-1 Nrt for music OR home theater, I cannot recommend them highly enough. They are a STEAL for the sound quality you are getting. I don't want this thread to dissuade you from buying simply because I want more volume. They are NOT "quiet" speakers. Its just that I'm after INSANELY LOUD speakers. I'm not a normal person, k? I'm keeping my Sierras even though they don't meet my insane volume needs, because they sound so hypnotic to me. I can't quite explain it. Sorry for the novel! :eek:

RandomName

07-31-2011, 11:23 PM

I just want to point out that if you actually maxed out the power capabilities of the Sierra-1, you could in fact hit 105db peaks (or even constant)...

I don't quite understand WHY you would want this, but based on the efficiency of the Sierra-1 which is 87db.

2 Sierra-1 at 200w at 12 feet the SPL would be 104.8db. The Sierra-1s can also handle peaks of up to 400w (clean/unclipped) which would give an spl of 107.8db.

Now where it gets far simpler to reach reference volume, is when you add in multiple speakers. 6 Sierra-1 can reach 105db at 20ft with just 65w.

At 100w at 12 feet, your SPL on the Sierra-1 can go from 101.8 to 105.3 just by adding a center channel.

Now of course this plays into how the audio was mixed, but in general the really loud sounds like explosions are mixed across all channels partly for this very reason (and because lower frequency sounds aren't really directional at least by human perception because the waves are larger than the distance between our ears O_o)

Now if you were to put the speakers it multi-out stereo (where it sends the same stereo signal to all the speakers), and they were all running on amps that did 200w stable, your SPL would be 114.3 and the 400w peaks would actually hit 117.3. Keep in mind that no matter how clean your source and amps and speakers are, listening at levels like this for anything more than occasional peaks will damage your hearing.

Regardless, my point is you can hit reference volume with most any efficiency speaker if it's well enough made, personally I would rather have a speaker with 85-90db efficiency, and drive it properly, than try and use a 95db efficiency speaker with an integrated amp. The biggest problem is that with higher efficiency equipment, you start opening the door to amp noise. There is quite literally NO benefit to high efficiency speakers OTHER than needing less power to get there, but between buying another set of speakers and driving them with the same subpar amp built into our 3312 or buying a decent power amp and using the same speakers, to me it makes more sense to go for the amp. As while both might make your system louder, methinks the dedicated poweramp would make it sound better. (Plus it would give you headroom which is always a good thing and more freedom to upgrade from a receiver to a dedicated pre-pro setup later)

flyingturtle

08-01-2011, 12:05 AM

Yeah, I can relate. I love my Sierras , in fact my friends are probably sick of me talking about how good they sound. I've literally forced lots of people to come over listen to my speakers and I found out the hard way that not everyone cares about good sound as I am. LOL. But the ones that do are really impressed. (Is it really that weird of a hobby?)

Anyway, my Sierras are in a 2-channel music system and I've really been neglecting my other system, my HT system, and I too heard good things about the 340SE for HT use, so I decided to upgrade one of my speakers, my center channel to a used 340SE center and while I was expecting good things, I was more than just satisfied, I was really impressed. The clarity and imaging of the 340SE was far better than my previous speaker (Athena) and it even made my L/R mains, Epos monitors, sound better as the front soundstage became more clear and the details on the highs from the 340SE was a better match with the metal tweeters of the Epos monitors. The 340SE is a very nice speaker, especially for it's price. If asked, I'd definitely always pick the Sierra over the 340SE as the better speaker, especially for music, but that 340SE center is darn impressive. Makes me want to get a pair of 170SE now to see how they sound. Eeek...I'm becoming an Ascend junky, I already have a pair of HTM 200SE coming my way to upgrade my surrounds.

Anyway, I hope that doesn't make you second guess your decision. =)

On the flip side, I did inquire about the availability of new 340SEs and I was told that they would not be in stock till mid-August. So that may compel you even more to keep your Sierra-1s.

j0nnyfive

08-01-2011, 03:30 AM

Awesome... thanks for the responses guys! Much, much to think about. I love thinking about this stuff. It's so new to me. :) Anyway, down to business..

Flying Turtle, it's a disease isn't it? lol I've been working at a hot factory job for the past 6 months, 7 days a week, and on many days, 10 hours per day. I'm single, live like a vampire (up all night, sleep all day, work in the evening). This isn't my ideal existence, but it will get better soon. Anyway, I said all that to say that all this speaker research and listening is keeping me healthily insane. It gets me through. :D You don't have to worry about changing my mind about keeping the Sierras. I'm decided now. I really like how they can draw you in with really subtle, shimmering, sparkling, teeny tiny sounds and then punch you in the face with a bass note. lol Like, you thought I was this little bitty speaker didn't ya? BOOM!!

RandomName, thanks for all your good info! I'm digesting it and thinking about it. What you say does seem to make good sense. That amp could set me up for the future as well couldn't it? I'd be ready for the pre-pro later.. hmm... HMMMMMM........

Now, I have a question about what you said about high efficiency "equipment". What did you mean by equipment, and integrated amp? This, I wasn't considering. What type of equipment were you thinking of? And by amp noise, what do you mean? Amp noise coming through the speaker? Amp noise coming from inside the speaker? Or are you saying that a highly sensitive speaker would too easily reveal flaws in "lesser" amps, thus requiring me to upgrade to a better amp anyway?

If this isn't against any type of forum policy, let me ask everyone their opinion or impressions about a speaker I'm curious about: Chase Home Theater's SHO-10. I think the sensitivity is like 97db? Now, granted, it absolutely REQUIRES a subwoofer due to limited extension, but... with sensitivity that high, there's got to be some catch somewhere. I'm pretty dang sure it won't have the finesse of the Sierra or most likely even the 340, but I'm so curious about the sound this would make. Ugh.. I have the disease now I'm afraid.

If you know nothing about that speaker, that's okay. I'm more interested in knowing more about that "type" of speaker than anything. Anyone know of any good resources that I could use to study up on speaker design? Even theater design, or theater sound standards, etc?

Thanks! :)

choirbass

08-01-2011, 06:26 AM

Now, I have a question about what you said about high efficiency "equipment". What did you mean by equipment, and integrated amp? This, I wasn't considering. What type of equipment were you thinking of? And by amp noise, what do you mean? Amp noise coming through the speaker? Amp noise coming from inside the speaker? Or are you saying that a highly sensitive speaker would too easily reveal flaws in "lesser" amps, thus requiring me to upgrade to a better amp anyway?

Hopefully I can help here. More specifically, moving up from a JVC 8030-VBK (a typical av receiver as such integrates both the processors and amplifiers in one package). But moving up from that to the preamp/processor & powered amplifier separates provided a noticeably cleaner output (I didn't realize how noisy the internals of the JVC were until I decided to use it first as a preamp to the UPA-7, which did prompt the UMC-1 Pre/pro purchase not long after, but that fixed that dilemma. 'buying cheap will get you just that, a more obvious problem sooner or later'. The internals of that av weren't capable of telling the difference in subtleties or qualities really, even in analog direct. I didn't know that beforehand though. Before it seemed fine.. Ignorance is bliss, lol. (the quality of internal components can definitely be a make or break thing, and can make a huge difference here, as long as your other components follow suit more, again, if something is lower quality internally. It'll show itself more, especially when other equipment is capable of revealing whatever flaws it has.

scape

08-01-2011, 07:34 AM

I would highly recommend a center channel for movies. it will take quite a bit off the amp load (which seems backwards but actually isn't) and increase relative volume levels ~+3 db while actually offloading amp duty quite a bit.. at probably ~20 watts total your system would run ~90db. 90db is loud in my opinion, which is above the level of when hearing damage sets in- so i'd keep that in mind.
now if you want reference level action, you will have to integrate a power amp, or 2, and a sub, or 2. there's no way around that unless you plan on getting super efficient speakers made specifically for cinema or live stage (think klipsch, jbl, qsc... all of which are designed to be paired with amps and subs.)
personally I'd start with a center channel, movies change quite a bit for the better with a center channel working. next would be a sub that does 25 hz reasonably (many do). then I'd consider a power amp, in my opinion any amp will do for movies, as long as it's quality construction and is quiet (fans to cool it.)
good luck on the setup, i'm jealous of your nrt's!

RandomName

08-01-2011, 08:59 AM

Two real downsides to speakers like the SHO-10, first is size, those speakers are going to be SUBSTANTIALLY larger than the Sierra-1s (they pack a 10" woofer) and second is that their limited frequency response extends in both directions.

They also are using horn tweeters which I personally find to be harsh and grating.

As for your question about noise, there are 3 types of noise, source noise, which there is nothing you can do anything about, amp noise which is caused by interference from the power supply and other nearby electronics, and line noise which will only really affect the wires on longer runs.

Higher efficiency speakers will make amp noise and line noise more apparent (signal noise is all just a matter of volume)

The real question I suppose is how big is your listening environment going to be. And are you planning to build out a full 5.1-7.2 system?

With 6 of those speakers, even at 30 feet away you could only turn your amp up to 15w before the speakers were at 105.1db and at 12 feet you could only turn the system up to 2.5 watts before you hit reference which would be severely limiting in terms of your volume control. Systems like that are really designed for huge screening rooms, not your average 20'x30' in house screening room.

I don't really know why you would want such loud speakers in any normal sized room unless you are just trying to build a system to damage hearing ^_^.

j0nnyfive

08-02-2011, 12:13 AM

Choirbass, I see you are fan of the amp idea too. lol Cool! I see what you are saying about cheapness and quality components. This is what drew me to Ascend Acoustics in the first place. I can tell that these speakers are... something else. :cool: I know that speakers really just spit back whatever you feed them. They need good sources. When I went from MP3 to FLAC on my portable player... wow... I never realized how much I was missing! I may go the amp route eventually. The main reason I purchased the Denon 3312 was for the preouts, to give me some ability to upgrade one step at a time later. I really like this receiver.

Scape, ... interesting. I never thought about the idea of a center channel giving me more volume with less strain on the receiver (is this right?). So, you would recommend I purchase future upgrades in THIS order:

1. Center channel
2. Subwoofer(s)
3. Amp

So, with the center channel, I'm getting a bit more volume overhead. (plus the added benefit of expanded sound stage of course)
With the subwoofer (powered I presume), I'm taking more strain off the receiver.. and then to round it all out I get an amp to completely relieve the receiver and "properly" power my speakers? This makes sense.

RandomName, good info! Let me ask you some questions (and anybody else as well)..

1. If I were to buy a center channel, would this somehow reduce strain on the receiver's amp? I'm not sure what 125 watt "discreet" means. I read what it means, but I also understand that it probably can't provide 125 watts to EVERY channel at the SAME TIME. Am I correct in this? How many channels can the amp provide 125 watts to simultaneously? 2? I guess what I'm asking is... okay, 125 x 2 = 250. So is my Denon only capable of supplying this much power simultaneously, or can it only provide 125 MAX per channel at any one time, and the amount it can provide overall (simultaneously) is well over 250? So, I guess I'm asking is this why having MORE speakers would give me more sound while relieving my receiver? Sorry for this confusing question. I hope it made enough sense. lol

2. My speaker cables are those cables that have 4 wires in them. I combined the wires to create 2 larger wires at (effectively) 11 gauge. I have 40 foot runs of each cable going to my speakers. I do have some slack left. I don't want to cut the cable if I don't have to because I haven't fully decided how I'm going to run the cable, and I may need the extra. What is the best way to "store" this slack without causing some type of line noise or affecting the sound in some way?

3. If I get a powered subwoofer and cross my speakers at 80 or 60hz or so, will this effectively increase my Sierras sensitivity, in a way? Or at least, reduce the amount of power required to generate a particular volume? My understanding is that bass is more power hungry than the high notes. Not sure though.

Thanks!

scape

08-02-2011, 06:51 AM

you would recommend I purchase future upgrades in THIS order:

1. Center channel
2. Subwoofer(s)
3. Amp

Thanks!

Yes, I would. I don't know many that would disagree (for home theater)
From my experience, the center channel has become more important than the subwoofer in upgrade status, but the sub takes a close second-- ultimately you'll want both.

I have a denon 1910 without the pre-outs, but one day I'll probably go that route and upgrade to separates.

As far as the center channel relieving strain, yes I believe so and here's why:
your amp runs 125 watts discrete (that word is so deceiving) and in reality is like 100+ watts total, it's not uncommon for a manufacturer to tout high wattage. to my knowledge the output stages for each channel are discrete, but there is one single transformer providing the power. you wouldn't want to run it at full power as you'd experience clipping and really bad distortion so instead you'd power roughly 100 watts or so, I have no idea what the ideal total wattage is before those two events begin happening and sounding worse. Let's assume your amp is 100 watts total power (across all channels); which I doubt that is even true too, from what I've experienced on my somewhat similar AVR. It will take less wattage to push the speakers louder if there are more speakers, to a very certain limit. Each time you add a speaker you tend to increase the perceived volume of your system, keeping that in mind the first few watts to power a speaker are it's most efficient because of the exponential power it takes to create volume from them.

Speaker sensitivity is generally taken at 1 watt of power, and recorded from 1 meter away. A speaker of 87 db sensitivity means just that, and to get that speaker to 90 db (which is considerably louder, look up 'decibel loudness chart') you would have to push roughly 8-10 watts of power to it. Say you wanted 95db? that'd be close to 260 watts of power needed.. yea quite a jump in power.
Luckily we don't need to rely on a single speaker cabinet to make things louder. In stage audio we simply stack more speakers up (well it's a bit more complicated than that), but by adding more speakers we have increased the volume (air pushing ability really) but not necessarily needed the same exact amount of power to do so. by adding a second similar speaker (let's assume for a second it's not stereo but the same exact source, mono) you have increased the relative decibels by around 3, and have essentially halved the power required to obtain the same amount of perceived loudness. this is because the first first watts of power to a speaker create quite a bit of loudness, and by adding speakers you have essentially increased speaker size and air pushing ability. an example is that 2 similar 10" speakers have roughly the same air pushing surface as a single 15" speaker.
to obtain 90 db at with our two 87db/watt sensitivity speakers would require roughly 4 watts of power, and 95 db would be ~130 watts. keep in mind this is rather generalizing the whole system and assuming the signal is identical to each speaker, but i think it will give you an idea of what's going on.

certain amps will have different characteristics, but in general you never run an amp wide open to obtain satisfactory volume, there will be too much clipping and distortion, among many other soon to be imminent issues. I generally try to get an amp that does 1.5x to 2x the power required for the venue.. once people listen to volume x, they want to push it to volume x++ after a while; so you usually want headroom.

if you get a center channel you essentially have increased the volume by 3 db again (now obviously in dolby and other standards of stereo-surround for movies each speaker performs it's own channel information, but often times the channels share information). so while this exact math is not available, it's somewhat close for the front 3 channels. 90db is now perhaps only 2 watts total power (running a mono signal ofcourse). 95db might be 60-70 watts.

Since stereo and surround are not mono signals, this does not hold up very exactly as there is much information in each channel that is different as well as shared-- and in I suppose would really matter on what the source is at this point. perhaps you could take the middle, and assume each additional speaker provides an average 1.5-2db db of sound reinforcement, with a range up to 3db total for each additional speaker if the speakers are producing the same signals. that is ofcourse totally made up guesstimates; but you can see 3 speakers up front greatly reduces need for wattage for a 90db output, which is loud, and beyond the point of hearing damage, luckily we usually don't sit 1 meter from our speakers. I think people forget how loud things really are..I started wearing ear plugs to movie theaters.

beyond that, the center channel for movies is exceptionally important if the source material is more than 2 channels, as there is channel information that pertains to one of the important parts of a movie, dialogue. infact quite a bit gets put into the center channel. if you have a chance google movie theater screen speaker arrays. the center channels are some of the craziest, massive arrays in the whole theater, all for just that 1 channel.

now ofcourse someone can take the standpoint that subwoofers are more important, as they do relieve quite a bit of strain on the main amp (assuming they're powered separately) as the lower frequencies take more power to produce; but if it were me, having realized what i know now for my stereo, I would get a center channel first. mostly because subwoofers, even cheap ones, will suffice for many people for movies. I guess you should ask yourself how much you are willing to spend.

one last thing to consider, and perhaps most important of all is your room setup. are the speakers placed properly, is the seating close enough? there is quite a bit that goes into a good listening room. one thing to consider is that every additional meter of distance reduces the perceived volume by 6db, roughly.
so if your speaker is 87db/watt and your seating is 10 ft away, it will be 75db at 1 watt of power, which is still rather decent for volume's sake. two speakers would be roughly 81db for the 1 watt of power at that distance. i think this gives you enough to work on to make your own decision, but i'm sure someone will chime in with some more to the point conclusions and examples to help you make a good choice; either way it sounds like you already have with your sierra's :)

DougMac

08-02-2011, 11:09 AM

I have the Sierra-1 Nrt speakers sitting in my small apartment living room right now. They do sound exquisite.
-Jonathan
Jonathan,
I'm glad you decided to keep your Sierra's. When the time comes to use them in a home theater at adequate volume levels, I think you'll find them sufficient.

I'd hold off making judgements until you have a true multi-channel setup. I agree with your acquistion plan: center channel, then sub, then amplification. I'd get surround speakers before amps if your setup allows. I suggest the Sierra Center, although the 340SE center would work welll with your Sierras.

When you get surrounds you could also go with Sierras, if you could afford it. An alternative would be to use 170's or even HTM 200's. I use 170's for side surround and 200's for rears. Pans are seamless. BTW, I'm running 340's across the front.

If you're just using a stereo pair for movie watching, you'll be astounded by a 7.1 system. My wife, who has put up with my audio hobby since we started dating in high school, has never expressed much interest. Now that we have a dedicated home theater, she has become quite the audio snob. She much prefers the audio in our HT over the local cineplex and doesn't like to watch TV at friends' houses.

MichaelG

08-02-2011, 09:40 PM

I agree with the center and subwoofer as well! I would also recommend the Sierra center over the CMT-340. I started with the 340's and upgraded to the Sierra's and for a while used the 340 center. I found the Sierra center integrates better and, since its a matched sensitivity, the balancing was better.

I moved my 340's to the back surrounds and in my experience the Sierra's (NRT 4 me) are the best for movies or music. We listen to both and movies have a ton of music in them. I bet I say weekly to my wife how much I love my sound system!

My living room/dining room/Kitchen combo is 36 X 32 and I have no problem with enough sound. My sub (VTF-3 Mk 2) is a big part of the total mix and makes movies and TV intense!

Good luck!
Michael

j0nnyfive

08-03-2011, 12:59 AM

Scape,

Thank you very much for that detailed response! I think I'm starting to understand "speaker math" a bit more now. lol Let's see if this makes sense:

1 speaker n @ 87 decibels = 1 watts.

1 speaker n @ 90 decibels = 2 watts. (double wattage per 3 decibels)

2 speakers n @ 90 decibels = 2 watts (1 watt per speaker).
3 speakers n @ 93 decibels = 3 watts.
4 speakers n @ 96 decibels = 4 watts.
5 speakers n @ 99 decibels = 5 watts.

So our demand for wattage becomes more linear instead of exponential, in a way? Assuming that a "mono" signal is being sent to each speaker, am I understanding this correctly? Maybe I'm oversimplifying, but am I in the ballpark? lol

DougMac,

I really wish I didn't live in this tiny apartment, I am so stoked at the idea of having a sub and surrounds and center. Geeze... With what you said though, about reserving judgment until I have a multichannel setup... I may have to wait until I move out of this apartment before I do this, unfortunately. Actually, this leads me to my next question which I will ask in a second...

MichaelG,

I agree. I think my center will have to be identical to my mains. I simply won't have anything less than that! I'm pretty dogmatic when it comes to having a center channel that is identical to my left and right channel. I want as perfectly seamless panning ability across the front as I can get! This also leads me to my next question..

Questions for everybody/anybody:

1. I am using a projector (Mitsubishi HC4000) that is DLP and doesn't have a "screen shifting" function. The screen can get larger or smaller, but I cannot scoot it up or down the wall. I cannot have my center channel level with my other 2 speakers. It will HAVE to be practically sitting on the carpet floor, tilted up. So my speaker configuration across the front will look something like this: - _ - 2 speakers high, 1 speaker low. Now... is it STILL worth it to buy a middle channel if I am constrained by this? Would the "phantom center" concept be better for me here? Again, I'm thinking of my apartment here, so I do not need any loudness here. But I DO like the idea of sound coming from the middle... but it would be middle, but lower... hmm..... did I just answer my own question? lol

2. I would like surrounds, but would it be worth it to get surrounds without a sub? I'm thinking since the surrounds won't be able to go as low as the Sierras, are they basically dependent on a sub, since a sub's main job is to produce bass which is non-directional?

I hope you guys don't get any ideas about charging me for consulting fees! lol Thanks again! :D

p.s. I would really like to have surrounds at least, but I'm afraid they wouldn't work well without the sub. What do ya'll think? (Yes, I am from Arkansas! Woohoo!)

scape

08-03-2011, 05:23 AM

doubling the power will up the speaker volume by +3db, I think I may have mentioned +1 db earlier
an additional speaker will in theory provide up to 3db sound reinforcement. but as far as having multiple speakers, it gets tricky because of possible phase cancellation from the speakers are at different locations, as well it's also an exponential game; the center would still give about 1.5db increase, but that may not be exactly enough to be perceived by you.
each additional meter of distance is about -6db of volume loss
I'd also stress that +10db is going to be perceived as twice as loud, to me that's really friggin loud, haha

here's a decent site i just googled: http://www.musiccenters.com/vol.html

I never read where you described your room, but if you're trying to fill a very large room, extremely loud volume would probably not be possible unless you ran multiple sierra's in series and parallel and built some sort of stack (someone on this forum has! wish i had the link, it was awesome)
so -10db would seem half as loud..

with all that said, I think 85+db at the listening position is more than enough for most of the people out there, excluding those with hearing damage :) or who want to 'be in the movie' and make gun shots almost lifelike (and damaging hah.) i'm guilty of this too.

I'd assess your room setup, and probably place the speakers closer to your seating if possible (atleast within 10ft of listener) because that's probably best not to mention free, I'd also play with which settings you're using on your receiver. Then I'd begin putting money away for a center channel and eventual sub.

j0nnyfive

08-03-2011, 07:30 AM

Scape,

Ahhh... thanks for that link! My math was wrong. It's still exponential with 2 speakers giving you a 3db increase, but then it takes 4 speakers to get you the next 3db, but then due to phase cancellation, etc. So there is a point of diminishing returns at play, and also the fact that different channels will have different information being played over them, etc. So, no free lunch. lol

I've seen a lot of mention of hearing damage in this thread, and I really appreciate these warnings, more than everybody knows. I am also concerned about my hearing. I'm afraid that I came across in my original post the wrong way when I was exaggerating about "insane" volume levels. I'm not really a person who likes to listen to things loud for the sake of them being loud. Having said that, however, I have never really thought of a movie theater as being "extremely" loud. And, considering how much time I actually spend watching movies (which isn't TOO too much), I wouldn't think that my exposure time would be significant enough to cause damage. I mean, the movie doesn't make sounds at 105db the whole time you're watching it, does it? I figured that was just the peak. I think I read somewhere that an ACTUAL gun blast is like 150db. And I don't own a motorcycle but it said the sound of the engine is like 100db. Granted this wouldn't be for every motorcycle or every gun for that matter. But putting this into perspective, I didn't think watching a movie for a limited amount of time (I watch about 2, maybe 3 per week) would be too bad, considering I probably wouldn't even listen @ reference level most of the time, anyway.

Also, my desire of loudness isn't directly because I WANT to listen to it that loud all the time, but more of a desire for the ABILITY to do so, if I choose. Most of the time, I would listen to it at a lower volume level. But if I have some company sometime, and we want to listen at "theater" levels, I would like to be able to accomplish this without the speaker pooping out on me due to compression or whatnot. :D Like an earlier poster said, "overhead is good."

I'm thinking that I'm just going to stick with 2 Sierras and nothing else while I'm in this apartment. I'll wait UNTIL I get a new place to decide what I'll need. I DO like the center channel idea, but if I can't properly place it evenly with the other 2 speakers, I feel I may be defeating the purpose of having a center channel (in a way). I think if I cannot create a seamless sound stage (having all speakers even across the front), then I do not want to break the illusion caused by my phantom center. However, one could argue that listeners sitting off-axis may benefit from having a center channel, even if it isn't perfectly placed. I just don't know if it would be worth it.

Thanks! :cool:

scape

08-03-2011, 07:56 AM

only reason i mention hearing damage is because I found out i have some, in the 4-5khz range, which is the range our ears are most sensitive to. it's rather common, and luckily my damage is pretty superficial; i don't want it to get worse. it's not that i have bad hearing, in fact quite the opposite, i can hear a very extended range of hearing, and surprise people what i can actually hear and mention to them-- they think i'm crazy until 20 minutes later realize they hear some noise or whatever it may be. i have this deal of walking into a room and knowing the tv is on, even if it's muted; the high pitched sequel actually drives me bonkers and i notice that most people don't even notice it. i'm sure some people here have the same deal.
i believe it only takes 15 minutes of 85+db to cause some form of hearing loss. whether it be permanent, i don't know. but i am with you, spirited volume levels are fun.
i battled the center channel issue for a while myself, and infact let my center gather dust for a year; but i built a center channel stand and placed it in a great location (audibly) and it made the difference for my room. i typically use dolby pl2 music mode, as that keeps things more on the stereo sides and less in the center; and really helps for listening to music i think. it also took quite a bit of tinkering on the receiver to get the right volumes for each speaker to sound good to my ears- but then again my room setup is whacky, living in an efficiency is only good for one thing: saving money :)
luckily ascend has a return policy, maybe you should check it out. if you're not big on the center channel idea, i do strongly suggest a sub-- quite a bit goes into making a sub sound good in the room with the other speakers; but it's definitely worth it, especially for movies.
good luck!

j0nnyfive

08-03-2011, 01:54 PM

I am reading about Dolby reference levels and articles discussing whether theaters are too loud. Hmm... I may NOT shoot for "reference" after all! ;) I didn't realize how loud this really is. They say it has possibly increased over time. Not sure though. Doing research. :o

milkfat

08-04-2011, 11:07 AM

Dolby reference level specifies that each speaker must be capable of producing 105dB at the listening position. The subwoofer must be capable of 115dB at the listening position. All channels driven equals (I think) a peak level of 120dB :eek:.

I think a reference level system is a nice goal. You don't always have to listen at reference levels. Certainly you should use common sense and adjust the level on a movie-to-movie basis.

Here's a nice calculator that lets you enter in a few numbers and see the dB capabilities at listening position.

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

For example: the Sierra-1 (87dB) requires ~3 times more amplifier power than the CMT-340 (92dB) to produce the same level of output. Then there is the fact that the CMT-340 has much more driver surface area - possibly meaning that it is more capable of producing the lower frequencies (near 80hz) at high levels than the Sierra-1. I'm not sure about all of the qualifications for that last statement though.

scape

08-04-2011, 12:57 PM

i think total driver excursion should be taken into account, in addition to total surface area. there are many 'long-throw' woofers that simply out compete standard larger sized woofers. it would be interesting to see a sierra with 2 woofers, that's for sure, but i guess that's what sparked the tower.

j0nny, after looking at the part where you said a center channel is not possible due to location, as well a subwoofer is not ideal due to you being in an apartment; I imagine an amp would do your system justice. have you looked at any amps as of yet? there are a ton to pick from. it is possible that an amp will improve dynamics and headroom if you're stepping up from your avr's amp.

j0nnyfive

08-05-2011, 03:48 AM

Milkfat,

I just got back from a speaker/home theater store in a nearby town and they let me bring my radio shack spl meter in to one of their little theater rooms. Holy crap 105 dbs was L O U D. lol Geeze.. I don't think I'd ever use it that loud... but then again, it would be nice to have a system that COULD... you know... just in case. ;) tee hee!!

Scape, you know... the amp may be just what I need for my next step. I haven't given it much thought yet tho. Even though I can't really turn it up to any significant volume, would having some sort of amp give me a noticeable improvement in quality? I guess it would be nice to have that overhead... you
know... just in case. ;) tee hee!!

sorry. I'll stop cackling now. :D

Today I have been playing with my new toy (spl meter). I would like to determine what the highest volume I can have my receiver at during a movie without it clipping. How would you do this? I'm thinking some sort of standard test tone that is meant to play at the loudest sound possible and then I can just slowly turn the volume up until my SPL meter reads whatever I think it should read as determined by my speaker sensitivity and receiver's power rating? Not sure... going to sleep now. Really tired right now...

Thanks for the replies!

scape

08-05-2011, 05:16 AM

i think denon's use compression to limit any sort of clipping, so you'd hear compression first- which is more difficult to discern by itself, i'd say.
a test tone wouldn't exactly be best in my opinion, mostly because you do not listen to test tones- but rather most of the audio spectrum during a movie. i'd pick some music with mostly constant full range (jazz and electronic are good in my opinion) and begin testing for distortion and compression by ear. compression will sound as you hit the compression wall that certain parts of music are no longer getting louder, and may even sound muffled to make up for the other parts; typically midrange suffers. there is probably a good article or how-to out there. since you have an spl meter you could test for your assumed max spl output based on what you already know: speaker sensitivity, number of speakers in conjunction, seating distance, and amp output. once you hit what you think would be your max you should atleast begin hearing something happen. i think denon is pretty smart when it comes to overcoming limitations such as amp power, and they may have a pretty advanced compression algorithm to take care of it- so it may take a few songs or movies before you realize where it begins.
as for amp types, a lot of people put faith in certain brands or types (class a/b etc) and I think at the end of the day the amp just needs to do its job and amplify without mucking up the signal too much. i'd personally stick to mainstream brands and not an ID company, call me crazy but i'd want the amp to be bullet proof and tried by hundred of thousands of users, not just thousands.

j0nnyfive

08-07-2011, 04:14 AM

Scape,

Good points. Thanks for your help! I have been uber busy the past few days so I haven't had a chance to post. I have decided to just stick with my system as-is right now. (2 Sierra Nrts and my Denon receiver). In this apartment, this sounds AMAZING. :) My buddies came over the other day and after we left one of them said "Your surround system is awesome". lol When I told him it was just 2 speakers he was pretty stunned. My Mom and Dad came over and had a listen and they were both impressed I think! I'm trying to piece together a good setup for my Dad at the moment. I will post this in a new thread.

Thank you all for your input! I love this forum. :) Thanks!

scape

08-07-2011, 03:27 PM

sweet, keep us posted!

cynan

08-08-2011, 03:35 PM

Yeah. 105 db is loud. 99% of my listening is below 90 db and most of that is probably around 80 db or or less.

On a related note, it's kind of funny how my girlfriend loves to go see movies at the theater: Occasionally I find some movies to be a bit too loud. When I mention this, she shrugs. (She also used to love to go to concerts all the time.)
However, if I try and play a movie (that we are both watching) at anything close to those levels at home (in actuality probably a good dozen db lower), she complains that it's too loud.

Maybe she's just not a fan of Ascend speakers :eek:

Scape,
Good points. Thanks for your help! I have been uber busy the past few days so I haven't had a chance to post. I have decided to just stick with my system as-is right now. (2 Sierra Nrts and my Denon receiver). In this apartment, this sounds AMAZING. :) My buddies came over the other day and after we left one of them said "Your surround system is awesome". lol When I told him it was just 2 speakers he was pretty stunned. My Mom and Dad came over and had a listen and they were both impressed I think! I'm trying to piece together a good setup for my Dad at the moment. I will post this in a new thread.

I really like my Sierra NrTs with my Denon AV receiver too. Before I upgraded to NrT, I used to go through the hassle of switching to my 2-channel amp (Virtue Sensation) for music all the time. With the NrTs, I feel less compelled to do so. It just seems that the Denon and the Sierras are now a bit better match than before the upgrade. Or maybe I'm just getting lazy... And the NrTs sound so good that even a lesser-sounding amp is more than good enough.

Edit: @j0nnyfive: Just wanted to add that my Denon is only rated at 105 Watts per channel into 8 ohms for multichannel and about 130 watts for 2-channel and it's more than loud enough with my Sierras (in about 500-600 or so square foot space, at about 8 to 10 feet away from the front speakers). Just because the Denon starts at -60 (or whatever) and you have to get to -20 before it gets to a "reasonable" volume is not something to worry about. When listening to movies at a level at the very loudest that I like it, I would never go past -10. Normally, I'll listen closer to -20. And, theoretically, the receiver should handle the 0 volume level just fine. If you do not find the levels to be very loud at -10 in your small space, perhaps check your source. For example, if you are playing Dolby or DTS tracks from a computer and are not using bit-streaming (ie, the computer decodes the audio tracks instead of the receiver), this can cause a drastic reduction in volume - I ran into this myself with Widows Media Player Classic. If the Denon is set to bitstream, it will indicate "DTS" or "Dolby Digital" or whatever on the display. Otherwise, it will indicate "Multichannel" or "PCM" if I recall correctly.

When you do move into a bigger space, you can worry about having enough volume when the time comes. But unless your listening space is quite large, I would think the Denon should be up to the task with the Sierras.

j0nnyfive

08-09-2011, 01:44 AM

Thanks for the reply Cynan!

That's funny about the relative loudness thing. I think sometimes we psychologically accept things as "okay" in on setting but then our brain says stop in another setting. Like, the theater volume is okay, but at home it just SEEMS too loud because of where we are. My theory anyway. :)

My source right now is my PS3. Great bang for buck, btw. For 300 bucks you can't get much more in one machine I think.

Now having watched several movies on the Sierras, I think a large part of my volume concerns has a lot to do with the recording/mixing of the movie itself! I think some movies are just made... badly. Dialogue in some scenes is just hard to hear but the music in the background is louder than it should be. To my ears anyway. But in a different scene, the dialogue is perfect (slightly too loud), etc. I'll pop in another movie, and it won't have that problem. I'm starting to see the differences in how the sounds are put together for different movies. I like how the Sierras allow me to hear this level of detail. Now, when I say different movies, I mean movies from the 80's, then 90's, then past 2000, etc. But, yeah, I think the Sierras are very much up to the task of HT. Very much so. I'm listening at about -25 on average now I think. I turn it from -30 to -20, sometimes a bit higher, depending on the scene.

davef

08-09-2011, 12:09 PM

Now having watched several movies on the Sierras, I think a large part of my volume concerns has a lot to do with the recording/mixing of the movie itself! I think some movies are just made... badly. Dialogue in some scenes is just hard to hear but the music in the background is louder than it should be. To my ears anyway. But in a different scene, the dialogue is perfect (slightly too loud), etc. I'll pop in another movie, and it won't have that problem. I'm starting to see the differences in how the sounds are put together for different movies. I like how the Sierras allow me to hear this level of detail. Now, when I say different movies, I mean movies from the 80's, then 90's, then past 2000, etc. But, yeah, I think the Sierras are very much up to the task of HT. Very much so. I'm listening at about -25 on average now I think. I turn it from -30 to -20, sometimes a bit higher, depending on the scene.

Honestly, you should really find a way to integrate a center channel into your system. It will make a HUGE difference :)

j0nnyfive

08-10-2011, 02:14 AM

Hey Dave!

Thanks for all your helpful emails! I know I probably seem like some kind of major OCD nut. lol

The primary reason I've been shying away from a center channel is because of an experience I had walking into a home theater store in a nearby town. They had a room set up where all the speakers were below the screen, and I remember walking in and feeling odd while watching the screen. I could too easily localize the sound as coming from below the screen and not from the picture. Kinda felt like there was a narrator standing down below narrating what was happening on the image above. lol This bothered me.

As of now, my speakers are to the left and right of the screen. The tweeters are even with my ears and about a third of the way up the screen. I'm afraid if I place a center channel below the screen (my only option currently), I'll get that weird narrator below the screen effect, and have panning issues from left to right, as my center will only be about a foot off the floor, if that.

Is this something that someone can easily get used to and "forget" about? Are the benefits worth it? I'm just not sure. (thinking thinking)

Thanks!

P.S. My screen is 110" diagonal, and I sit about 11 feet away. There is about 19" of clearance below the screen. My left and right speakers are to the sides of the screen, toed in toward my center seat, and about 1.5 feet from the wall. Not sure what I would set the center on either, or how I would orient it. I'm definitely open to the idea though! Lots of people seem to be a fan of the center. I'm beginning to wonder...

scape

08-10-2011, 05:07 AM

i'm going to chime in again with my own experience: I find the issue more prevalent if the speaker is above the screen, mostly because ear-level is typically lower than you'd think (most people tend to slouch on the couch). I try to keep the tweeters within 1-2 feet of eachother; and about -1 to +2 ft relative to my ear level. since you have a projection screen (unless that's some crazy plasma [please invite me over then haha]) you can purchase an audio transparent screen-- to me that is the absolute best choice when it comes to theater since the speaker can be placed upright and positioned perfectly (behind the acoustically transparent screen that is.)

check out dalite, they have great screens for this reason. the only thing you might have to account for is room dimensions and seating distance, since you'll want some distance behind the center, you may have to move the screen out a bit. i'd seriously consider doing this

j0nnyfive

08-10-2011, 11:57 AM

Hey Scape!

The AT screen is something I would really like to do at some point. I picked out some woven fabric from Chris Seymour's website, and ordered a sample. Great stuff. My main problem, and the reason I decided against it was this small living room. If I move my screen out that far, I would be shrinking the size of the room pretty dramatically. Too much floor space would be gone, and I would be forced to watch a smaller picture as well. But, I'm not totally against the idea of a center. I may try it when I build my funds back up from my last big purchase. ;)

P.S. If I ever get a plasma that big... I can't think of anything clever to type here. lol

scape

08-10-2011, 12:27 PM

there is a recommended viewing distance vs screen size; this website happens to have a calculator http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

there are other ones out there as well. if you use a q plug on the center channel you could probably flush mount it within what you already have setup. or you could move the screen in 1 ft and have a 1.5sh ft space behind the speaker then-- which should be 'enough'. i know what it's like to have difficult setup for a room; every place has it's ups and downs

just to reiterate: recommended thx viewing distance parameter: 10ft is 78" wide of image projection, 11ft should be 86" wide at 16:9.
but then again, who made thx boss!

j0nnyfive

08-10-2011, 10:38 PM

Hmm... I'm gonna try out that THX viewing distance. I've thought about looking up a calculator but I just never got around to it. I forgot about my Q plugs! Gotta go pick those up from parents' house. :D Sweet. What to watch, what to watch... having a theater is so nice. Will tell you how it went!
Gotta go pick up those plugs first.

ronbo

08-18-2011, 10:50 AM

Honestly, you should really find a way to integrate a center channel into your system. It will make a HUGE difference :)

Agreed, some receivers will engage dynamic compression on 5.1 soundtracks if you elect to use a phantom center.

DavidD

08-18-2011, 11:41 AM

Agreed, some receivers will engage dynamic compression on 5.1 soundtracks if you elect to use a phantom center.

Is that what Dave was referring to? I wasn't sure.

j0nnyfive

08-18-2011, 03:23 PM

Hmm... dynamic compression without a center huh? Never thought of that. I wonder why.

Either way, I've been satisfied with my 2 channel setup simply because these speakers are GALAXIES ahead of what I was used to hearing (my computer speakers. haha!)

Anyway, I know this thread was called CMT 340s vs Sierra-1 Nrts, but I've just taken advantage of the Memorial day special and am trading in my Nrts for the towers. :) I should have just saved up for the towers from the very beginning. Now that I've heard the Sierras, I feel I must go all the way. I need MOAR. More sensitivity, more imaging, more bass, more sparkle, more power handing, more midrange, more money (I know I know), but... here's the experience I recently had that made me decide this:

A couple days ago I went to the local cinema. I haven't been to the movies in almost 6 months. I was expecting to be blown away by BIG sound and BIG picture and.... it was a good movie (Captain America was very enjoyable), but I wasn't impressed by the sound. I was SHOCKED. It sounded very.... mediocre. And, (get ready to point and laugh at me)... too loud. Or, at least too loud for THAT level of sound quality. I was thinking... if it's going to sound like this, the least you could do for me is turn it down a little to save my precious ear drums. It didn't sound "bright" or "warm" or whatever... it just sounded meh. MEH! But, this was a revelation. The Sierras have accustomed me to a new level of sound expectation. I'm ruined for life. Spoiled.

Thanks Dave. :p

DougMac

08-22-2011, 09:08 AM

A couple days ago I went to the local cinema. I haven't been to the movies in almost 6 months. I was expecting to be blown away by BIG sound and BIG picture and.... it was a good movie (Captain America was very enjoyable), but I wasn't impressed by the sound. I was SHOCKED. It sounded very.... mediocre. And, (get ready to point and laugh at me)... too loud. Or, at least too loud for THAT level of sound quality. I was thinking... if it's going to sound like this, the least you could do for me is turn it down a little to save my precious ear drums. It didn't sound "bright" or "warm" or whatever... it just sounded meh. MEH! But, this was a revelation. The Sierras have accustomed me to a new level of sound expectation. I'm ruined for life. Spoiled.

Thanks Dave. :p
My wife and I went to a new cinema in the area and I was pleasantly surprised the sound didn't blow me out of my seat like it does at other theaters. I was so impressed I sought out the manager to express my gratitude. He was glad someone had noticed and taken the time to thank him. He said that just before they opened, the audio engineers came in and tuned the theaters. When they were finished, he went to each to audition. At the end, he told them to turn down the volume. The audio engineers protested, saying that it was standard procedure to set up that audio to reference levels. He overrode their protestations and made them turn down the sound level.

Also, my wife has remarked that she no longer enjoys going out to movies. She said: "The sound quality and picture quality of our home theater is so much better, why would I want to go to the trouble and spend the money? Besides, they don't serve wine!"