B&W Owner's Thread - Page 696 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
Reply
Thread Tools
post #20851 of 20857 Old Yesterday, 07:35 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by postrokfan View Post
The HTM62 is designed to be paired with the 686 or 685. However, if you are referring to the 685 S2 I wouldn't hesitate to go with the HTM61 S2. It's a better design than the HTM61 S1. That's a fairly large room also so that's another reason to go with the larger center.
Thanks. Yes. I am talking about the S2. I like the three way on that center. Why is that that a bunch of people say its performing poorly compared to the HTM62?
agerson is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #20852 of 20857 Old Today, 09:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
chef jer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by agerson View Post
I am looking at setting up a 5.1 system in my 17 x 17 living room with 685 fronts. Is the natural pair for these the the 686 as rears and the HTM62 as a front? Or is it the HTM61 (which I have read mixed opinions on)?
I went with this same set up and have been very pleased with how the HTM62 S2 and 686 (rears) match with the 685's. I don't feel like the 62 gets lost in this set up.

Samsung 64F8500 - Marantz sr7008 - B&W 685 S2, 686 S2, HTM62 S2, KEF Cube (upgrading soon - TBD)
chef jer is online now  
post #20853 of 20857 Old Today, 10:16 AM
Member
 
pathogen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by agerson View Post
Thanks. Yes. I am talking about the S2. I like the three way on that center. Why is that that a bunch of people say its performing poorly compared to the HTM62?
Please somebody correct me if I'm wrong but those criticisms were for the S1 HTM61. The S2 unit seems to be an excellent center. (full disclosure I have 683s2, htm61s2 and 686s2)
pathogen is offline  
post #20854 of 20857 Old Today, 10:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
postrokfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ft. Collins, CO
Posts: 3,355
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 215 Post(s)
Liked: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by agerson View Post
Thanks. Yes. I am talking about the S2. I like the three way on that center. Why is that that a bunch of people say its performing poorly compared to the HTM62?
As pathogen mentioned criticism is probably directed at the HTM61 S1 center not the S2. The HTM62 S2 is fine but as I said before the HTM61 S2 might be a better fit for your room dimensions.

HT: CM9 S2 FR/FL, CMC2 S1, CM5 S1 surrounds, ASW610; Yamaha rx-a2030; Parasound 2100; Parasound 275; Oppo BDP-93; ATV
2 Channel: Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 NrT FR/FL, ASW608; Parasound Halo P5; Parasound Halo A23; Rega RP1; Marantz CD5004

"Guns for show, knives for a pro..."
postrokfan is offline  
post #20855 of 20857 Unread Today, 03:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,671
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by agerson View Post
Thanks. Yes. I am talking about the S2. I like the three way on that center. Why is that that a bunch of people say its performing poorly compared to the HTM62?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pathogen View Post
Please somebody correct me if I'm wrong but those criticisms were for the S1 HTM61. The S2 unit seems to be an excellent center. (full disclosure I have 683s2, htm61s2 and 686s2)
Right. The 2-way MTM HTM61 suffered from an uneven horizontal dispersion pattern while the 3-way HTM61 s2 corrects this arrangement. I reserve comment (since I have not heard the speaker) about the HTM62 which has a similar configuration to the original HTM61.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is online now  
post #20856 of 20857 Unread Today, 05:39 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Thats good to know they have fixed it. I have also heard it said that the best center for a pair of 685's is another 685. Does this imply you would mount it sideways or stright up normal like the L/Rs above the TV poitned down? Anyone try this setup?
agerson is online now  
post #20857 of 20857 Unread Today, 06:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,671
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by agerson View Post
Thats good to know they have fixed it. I have also heard it said that the best center for a pair of 685's is another 685. Does this imply you would mount it sideways or stright up normal like the L/Rs above the TV poitned down? Anyone try this setup?
The horizontal array of drivers is what causes the irregular "venetian blind" horizontal dispersion, so putting a 685 on its side would create a similar effect. That is one reason why I prefer to use three identical (and identically oriented) speakers for L/C/R in both of my systems.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is online now  
Reply Speakers

Tags
B W , Bowers And Wilkings 685 Speakers , carver cm-1090
Gear in this thread - cm-1090 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off