And here it is, the 340SE2!!!

[curtis]

How would you rank the 200SE in this lineup?

As good as it is for its size and cost, it would probably not hold up well to its larger brothers especially in output, but let's see what Dave says.

[bgaviator]

The Sierras are a higher class of speaker, but I am discussing potentially using the 340SEs in my main HT (Home Theater) room which is larger, uses two subwoofers, and taking advantage of the 340SEs higher sensitivity and dynamics.

As good as it is for its size and cost, it would probably not hold up well to its larger brothers especially in output, but let's see what Dave says.

I’m just super concerned with off axis performance of anything I get. I know most regular MTM designs where the speakers are all lined up generally aren’t good for off axis performance. My wife sits at about 45° off center.

[curtis]

I’m just super concerned with off axis performance of anything I get. I know most regular MTM designs where the speakers are all lined up generally aren’t good for off axis performance. My wife sits at about 45° off center.

So your concern is off-axis performance.

How far away does your wife sit?
That said, the woofers of the 200SE are so close together, I am not sure it is that big of a deal, but we'll let Dave answer that.

[bgaviator]

So your concern is off-axis performance.

How far away does your wife sit?
That said, the woofers of the 200SE are so close together, I am not sure it is that big of a deal, but we'll let Dave answer that.

Her seat is about 10ft away, 40-45° off center I’d say

[davef]

The 340s are intriguing to me because of their high sensitivity and size which would fit into my existing setup. Just worried about off axis center channel performance. My wife sits at about a 45° angle from center. I’m not sure if I’m making too big of a deal of this or not. The 200se speakers have an offset tweeter and closer woofers which Dave told me will help eliminate some of the lobing issues normally associated with MTM designs. But I like the looks of the 340s better and would like to have the larger woofer size. I wonder if any plans to upgrade the 200SE series?

Hi bgaviator,

45 degrees off-axis seems very high, not sure how she would even be able to view the screen unless you are swiveling the TV.

Let me do some math for you and then run some simulations.

How far back is you wife sitting from the speakers? And, how far to the left or right would she be sitting from the center? I am looking for feet or inches, not estimated angles - thanks!

Also, are you able to post a pic of your room setup?

Thanks in advance!

[alphaiii]

Are there plans for the matching CBM-170SE2?

[davef]

Are there plans for the matching CBM-170SE2?

Not at this time. CBM-170's are a classic for us and still sell very well to consumers and professionals. I am not quite sure what we will do in this regard.

[rvsixer]

Not at this time. CBM-170's are a classic for us and still sell very well to consumers and professionals. I am not quite sure what we will do in this regard.

Please consider it. Klippel optimized CBM-170/HTM-200 SE2's would have me pulling the trigger for my upcoming 7.4.4 HT build.

[davef]

Please consider it. Klippel optimized CBM-170/HTM-200 SE2's would have me pulling the trigger for my upcoming 7.4.4 HT build.

Why not go with the new 340SE2? They are a big performance upgrade from CBM-170SE, even an NFS optimized CBM-170SE.

[rvsixer]

Why not go with the new 340SE2? They are a big performance upgrade from CBM-170SE, even an NFS optimized CBM-170SE.

Thanks for the reply, and understood.

Unfortunately MTM does not have the surround/atmos speaker dispersion needed to cover all seats. Based on CBM-170SE NFS results, I am not sure how well they would take to equalization (and I have been unable able to find NFS results on the HTM-200, so no idea how those fare on dispersion/directivity).

Hence the consideration for NFS optimized (of course only if it nets a worthwhile performance gain).