Advice Needed for Speaker Upgrade

[ScottO]

Hello All,

As the result of finally getting into home theater, we are finally looking to upgrade our speakers. We currently have one pair of CBM-170 Classics and a CMT-340 center Classic which have performed wonderfully. I have questions about how best to complete our speaker setup for home theater.

Our room is not dedicated to viewing / listening. Measurements are 16.5' x 16.5', the right side is fully open; the rear is a full run of large glass windows plus french doors. We have a 65" plasma TV with viewing distance of approx. 12.0 feet.

Our easiest option is to buy a pair of CBM-170SE's, put the 170 Classics to the rear, and finish with a Hsu VTF-2 sub. Or, we could do CMT-340 mains left and right with the 170's in the rear. My wife likes the look of the CBM-170's and is concerned the CMT-340's will make the room look heavy. I believe the CMT-340's will have a fuller sound in front but haven't seen many comparisons in the threads, nor professional reviews. (Note: the price tag on the Sierras is more than we'd like to spend, due to everything else we've purchased.)

Also, which is better for surrounds - CBM-170 or HTM-200? Since we're new to 5.1 and 7.1, I'm not sure which sounds get channeled to these other speakers.

Final question: we have two 24" basic Sanus stands. They work great for the CBM-170's, but would the CMT-340's be unstable? Would $140 + $38 shipping for the Ascend pedestals really make a difference?

Many thanks for your help,
--ScottO

[natetg57]

I really like the HTM-200's for surrounds. I use them with Sierra's and the sound is similar enough to blend well.

Are you mounting your surround speakers directly on the wall? If so, I would definitely recommend the HTM-200's since there is no port

[ScottO]

Are you mounting your surround speakers directly on the wall? If so, I would definitely recommend the HTM-200's since there is no port

Good question. Wall mounting, is not really an option for us - it would detract from the room's appearance plus the windows and french doors make it near impossible.

[Dark Ranger]

Hello All,

As the result of finally getting into home theater, we are finally looking to upgrade our speakers. We currently have one pair of CBM-170 Classics and a CMT-340 center Classic which have performed wonderfully.

Hi ScottO,

What are you looking to get from an upgrade? E.g. better detail/resolution, enhanced clarity, or just a "refresh" of your system? This might help narrow down the best choice.


Our easiest option is to buy a pair of CBM-170SE's, put the 170 Classics to the rear, and finish with a Hsu VTF-2 sub. Or, we could do CMT-340 mains left and right with the 170's in the rear. My wife likes the look of the CBM-170's and is concerned the CMT-340's will make the room look heavy. I believe the CMT-340's will have a fuller sound in front but haven't seen many comparisons in the threads, nor professional reviews. (Note: the price tag on the Sierras is more than we'd like to spend, due to everything else we've purchased.)

Since home theater is a priority, I would definitely recommend investing in the subwoofer. The added benefit is that you can offload the low bass to the sub, freeing up the primary channel speakers to play louder and cleaner.

The 340s are a step above the 170s, but I completely understand the Wife Approval Factor. A pair of 170 SE and a HSU subwoofer would definitely get you into the game.


Also, which is better for surrounds - CBM-170 or HTM-200? Since we're new to 5.1 and 7.1, I'm not sure which sounds get channeled to these other speakers.

The surround channels typically carry ambient effects and environmental noise, as well as follow the action sequences on screen. For example, if a freight train rumbles towards you and passes on your left, you'll hear the sound move from the center speaker to the front left, and finally to the rear left. The idea is to "surround" you in the movie and make it more believable. 5.1 is the gold standard and has been around for years. 7.1 is still relatively new, but more Blu-Ray titles are getting discrete 7.1 mixes.

My suggestion would be to start with 5.1 and see how you like that.

Regarding the speakers: the 170 is arguably the "better" speaker when evaluated on specs and sound quality. However, the 200 is no slouch and is quite remarkable in many applications. Here is my opinion:

If you want the "best" sound for surround channels, use the 170s. Otherwise, the 200s will provide excellent sound in a smaller, less intrusive package. I am currently using 200s for my surrounds and have absolutely no complaints. The aesthetics are better IMO than the 170s and the sound quality is nearly as good. I love 'em.


Final question: we have two 24" basic Sanus stands. They work great for the CBM-170's, but would the CMT-340's be unstable? Would $140 + $38 shipping for the Ascend pedestals really make a difference?

I cannot provide much insight here since I don't use these stands. One option is to try your 340c on the 24" Sanus stand and see how it works.


Summary:

If budget and WAF are factors, I'd go with 2x CBM-170 SE for fronts plus a subwoofer. Move your current 170 "classics" to the rear for 5.1.

If budget is not a concern (and your wife approves), I'd consider going CMT-340 SE for fronts plus a subwoofer. Move your current 170 "classics" to the rear for 5.1.


Hope this helps. :)

[ScottO]

Dark Ranger,

Thank you so much for such a thorough and well-thought reply. I had been trying to convince my wife on the sub, and I completely forgot about the front speakers getting clearer as a result. I think you just sold her... :cool:

As for the rest, I love our 170's but the voice handling through our CMT-340c center makes me think we would enjoy the CMT-340's up front. I think we will go for that arrangement, with the 170's in the rear. Positioning in true 5.1 won't work for our room so these will be placed 120 degrees behind. I think the sub will have to wait but it will happen this year.

Many, many thanks for taking the time to respond and for being part of such a great community. :)

[JustaSheep]

Sounds like a great plan. I use 340's as Surrounds and love them.

My wife LOVES having a subwoofer, btw. It's hard to imagine not having one now. I also listen to a bit of electronic/ambient music and have the sub picking up frequencies below 40hz. The sound is awesome.

Sheep

[sonicboom]

I have the 340SEs and 170SEs. After several months of having the 340s as an "upgrade", in my system with a subwoofer, I do not see a really clear step up when one goes from the the 170 to the 340. In fact, there are times when I seem to prefer the sound of the 170s. I don't understand, but that's what I feel. I know it's very subjective and perhaps not scientific.