First time poster, long time admirer here...

I just recently purchased a Panasonic X800U plasma television which is my first TV and I absolutely love it. I feel as though the next step in creating a more engrossing experience would be to put together a 5.1 or 7.1 setup.

My problem is, I spent a pretty good deal of money on a pair of Von Schweikert VR-3's a few years back, and still love them (+/- 1.5db from 125-3k & -3dB at 26Hz).

The dilemma is, I do not want to have to spend the kind of money it would take to purchase 4 matching Von Schweikert surrounds or even the pricey center channel.

I'm afraid I would be dissatisfied with how much I could potentially sell them for and shipping would be a nightmare.

How big of a deal would it be to use a less expensive brand for the center and surrounds? I'd love to be able to afford VS speakers all around, but I simply can't afford it. Also, if my speakers are able to reach 26Hz with ease, is it really that important to use a subwoofer? Is there a way to combine the .1 channel with the L + R output?

At this point, I have my TV's digital optical output hooked up to my receiver, so the receiver stays on the same channel. There are no HDMI inputs on the receiver, so I thought this would be the best way to go. Would there be a better way to

Thanks in advance for any advice.

My not-quite home theater system consists of the following components:
Panasonic TH-42PX800U
Pioneer VSX-1015tx (7.1, 120wpc)
PS3 (Blu Ray / DVD / Gaming)
Original Xbox (Strictly for XBMC media extender for formats the PS3 doesn't support - capable of 1080i output via component cables)

1) no, the surrounds matching are not nearly as important as l/c/r.
2) i personally would make every effort to match my center speaker with the l/r. but if it's cost prohibitive, at least try to come close.
3) yes, i would use a subwoofer, regardless of how low your mains reach.

How big of a deal would it be to use a less expensive brand for the center and surrounds? I'd love to be able to afford VS speakers all around, but I simply can't afford it.Even in this day and age of surround sound, the front soundstage remains absolutely critical. That's where your attention will be focused, whether watching a movie or listening to music.

So if I was forced to skimp on any of the speakers in my set-up, it would be the surrounds. The centre is the last speaker I would ever go cheap on, considering not only how much content comes from the centre (up to 80% of the soundtrack at times) but moreso the type of content (human voice, lead instruments, etc).

Personally, I would spend what it takes to get a matching centre for your Von Schweikert speakers (call the company, they'll help you choose), even if it means postponing purchase of the surrounds till you save up more money. Also, if my speakers are able to reach 26Hz with ease, is it really that important to use a subwoofer? Is there a way to combine the .1 channel with the L + R output?Setting the subwoofer output to 'None' on your receiver will re-route the .1/LFE channel content to your main speakers.

However, so-called "full range" speakers are no substitute for a separate subwoofer, for a couple of reasons. While your speakers may be able to reproduce low frequencies, chances are that a competent subwoofer will reproduce those same low frequencies better. More importantly, you can move the subwoofer to whatever location is best for bass reproduction in your room. Can't do that with your tower speakers (unless you're willing to take a saw to them).

As with the surrounds, you can push back the purchase of a sub till later, especially since your speakers do reproduce some bass. When expanding your 2-speaker set-up to 7.1, my priority would be as follows: centre speaker, side speakers, rear speakers, subwoofer. Others will prioritize differently (especially the last two items).

Good Luck,
Sanjay

Thanks a bunch for the advice, guys.

After looking over some of VSA's older product literature, it seems at the time the VR-3 speakers were made, they were designed specifically for 2 channel use. There was an entirely different line for home theater, so I'm not sure an ideal match exists...

What is the most important criteria for picking a suitable match for the center channel to accompany these speakers?

I hesitate to ask someone at the company for advice (if VS are in fact still operating) because I assume they would recommend a mismatched speaker in their own line before suggesting I go with a competitor. Not to mention the fact that their current center channel speakers are likely to be in the next galaxy over from my price range.

If you can't match the center, go phantom center.

At this point, I have my TV's digital optical output hooked up to my receiver, so the receiver stays on the same channel. There are no HDMI inputs on the receiver, so I thought this would be the best way to go. Would there be a better way to . . .

To the very best of my knowledge, using the optical out on a tv (including Pana's) will get you 2.0 at best.

Thanks a bunch for the advice, guys.

After looking over some of VSA's older product literature, it seems at the time the VR-3 speakers were made, they were designed specifically for 2 channel use. There was an entirely different line for home theater, so I'm not sure an ideal match exists...

What is the most important criteria for picking a suitable match for the center channel to accompany these speakers?


First of all, when Sanjay speaks, I usually shut up, sit down, and happily learn something. I'd like to add my 2 cents, and if Sanjay comes back, I will probably just shut up, sit down, and learn something.

The best solution would be a 3rd identical tower for your center. Depending on how far back you sit, how naturally reclined you are in your seat, you can perhaps mount the TV high enough, for the tower to fit flush under it.

I totally heard you loud and clear on your budget issue, but I'm trying to answer the boldfaced question.

Next best is something within the same line (which I believe you say does not exist). Next is within the same brand.

Other possibilities that I don't think have been mentioned. You can use "phantom center", or the lack of one. You tell the receiver that the center is not hooked up, and that info becomes split into your mains. IMHO, phantom often can sound better for many folks who sit dead on to display, especially when considering many of these people shove the center in a cabinet, with reflections galore, perhaps way too low, etc.

OTOH, some people say you might suffer some compression from having 3 channels going to two speakers.

Anyways, this frees up money for surrounds or sub.

As Sanjay has told you, you can have the LFE routed to the mains. To the best of my knowledge, however, this signal will be greatly attenuated. I believe this is done normally to protect consumers' speakers from becoming damaged.

I hope this helps.

-jostenmeat

If you can't match the center, go phantom center.

This can be taken a step farther. Have you considered trying your speakers with a receiver that has a "virtual surround" mode? Sometimes, this can be quite effective (especially with speakers that image really well.)

Thanks for all of the responses!

I certainly apologize if the sentence in bold typeface was taken as an insult to anyone who has contributed to this thread. That was certainly not my intention - I was just trying to make the primary focus of my post more apparent. In hindsight it was unnecessary.

I'm new here, so I apologize if I have spoken out of turn in any of this thread. I have certainly learned from everyone's contributions to this thread and have a good deal of respect for the members of this forum.

Jostenmeat - Thank you for the information regarding the deficiency of the optical output of my TV. I suppose I will have to reroute everything through my receiver and switch the audio and video separately.

Getting a third speaker of the same type would not work, because the towers are tall enough that the TV would no longer be in a comfortable viewing position if one were underneath.

Splitting the center channel between the two front speakers sounds like a great idea for a temporary solution. Thank you, Tulpa/Jostenmeat. Would it be better to use phantom than using a center channel speaker that is not on par with my L / R speakers?

Harold - I have been using a sort of "virtual surround" mode on my receiver, but it doesn't seem very effective. Perhaps that's because it's only able to use two channels of audio the way it's currently wired...

Also, if I'm unable to find (or afford) a center channel that matches the brand of my mains, what specifications would be important to consider?

Thanks again for the help.

Sanjay,

Would you position the side speakers any differently if you purchased them before your rear channel speakers? What is the reason you would purchase the surrounds in this order?

Splitting the center channel between the two front speakers sounds like a great idea for a temporary solution. Thank you, Tulpa/Jostenmeat. Would it be better to use phantom than using a center channel speaker that is not on par with my L / R speakers?

IMHO, it often can be better. Do I use a center? Yes. But I also have 8 seats.

It depends on just how "not on par" it is. A big benefit of the center is, well, to center the dialogue to the screen. Do you have seating for multiple viewers spread out? If just one main couch, phantom might still work very well.

Whatever center you do end up with, how you implement it is still a very important factor. Since it can't be totally flush in height with the mains, try to get it close to the same plane as you can. For more even panning.

Now, center speakers have a lot of compromises, typically. For instance, a horizontal MTM can produce audible lobing for viewers that are off-axis. So, maybe its not that much better than phantom after all. The h-MTM design's compromises will be based on the distance b/w the mids and xover point chosen.

Better designs include top mounted tweeter, WTMW, or coincidental. The problem will be that most of these choices are not matching.

I personally sought Sanjay's advice regarding matching. So, I matched! See, I found a good deal on a higher end model of the same brand, just different line. He said that its not about getting the best center you can afford, but to match your stage as well as you can. Now that I have recently done this, I see why he advised me to do so.

If you can't match, I think that the arguments towards phantom becomes all the more stronger.

I will make an educated guess that Sanjay listed that order according to how much info they reproduce proportionately. I believe he already explained the sub choice, because you still get at least some LFE. Its not entirely missing, IOW.

OTOH, my opinion is to get the "baddest" sub you can buy. For me, its key to the HT experience. Then some surrounds. Then the rears. (of course, if you forgo center).

I would contact the mftr for their recommendation on the best matching center. I would not have fear. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to. In fact, this is exactly the advice I typically give to someone looking for a matching speaker for existing mains that are no longer in production, for example.

Is there any detriment to 5.1 program material if a receiver sees side surrounds, but no rear surrounds generally?

You guys did a heck of a job clearing my remaining questions about surround sound. Thank you all!

No. 7.1 receivers can do 5.1 as well. All the surround info just goes to the two surrounds. In the receiver's setup menu, you turn off the "surround back" speakers.

The only thing you lose is some rear imaging advantages to 7.1. But if you can't arrange 7.1 properly, going 5.1 is better.

Would you position the side speakers any differently if you purchased them before your rear channel speakers?Surround placement for 5.1-speaker layouts is different from 7.1 set-ups.

When you have only 2 surrounds, their placement has to strike some sort of compromise between side and rear coverage in the surround field. Placing them along the side walls, but well rearward of the listening area, will let you hear some left-vs-right directionality as well as hear some phantom imaging behind you. The results will be best when seated in the sweet spot. If you move left or right on your couch, the phantom rear imaging will move with you (just as a phantom centre image would do in the front soundstage), collapsing to the nearest speaker. You'll have to place the surrounds on stands (a stack of boxes will do) and experiment till you find the locations that give the desired effect.

With 4 surrounds, you don't have to worry as much about compromised directionality or unstable imaging. You can place one pair of surrounds directly to your sides, for stable lateral imaging, and another pair behind you, to anchor rear sounds. No matter where you're sitting, sounds intended to come from behind you will always come from that direction. No magic involved, just a pair of speakers behind you (makes it difficult for those sounds to come from any other direction). You won't get this sort of stability (and wrap-around envelopment) from only 2 surround speakers. What is the reason you would purchase the surrounds in this order?I should have been clearer when describing my order of purchase. Rather than saying "sides" and "rears", it would have been better if I'd said 2 surrounds and then the next 2 surrounds. So I'm not suggesting setting up "side" speakers first and leaving a gaping hole in the surround field behind you, but instead getting 2 surrounds and setting them up properly for 5.1-speaker playback.

When building your system in stages, getting 2 surround speakers will at least let you hear surround sound. The next stage, buying 2 more surrounds for 7.1, is an incremental step and not as dramatic as going from 2 speakers to 5.1 speakers. So set up a proper 5.1 system, live with it and enjoy the results for a while. Then, when funds permit, go 7.1 by moving your surrounds forward (directly to your sides) and adding another pair behind you. Is there any detriment to 5.1 program material if a receiver sees side surrounds, but no rear surrounds generally?Nope, since almost all soundtracks are 5.1 channels anyway. The main difference from the receiver's perspective is that it won't have to split the surround channels into side and rear portions, as it would for 7.1 playback, and will simply send each channel to its respective speaker. 5 channels, 5 speakers; where's the detriment?

Best,
Sanjay