Originally Posted by DS-21
I don't think that's particularly or at all important, actually. LCR, yes. The rest of 'em, not so much. At least on material for which fidelity is an actual issue, such as orchestral concerts recorded in multichannel. For movies, whatever. Don't know, don't care.
Except when you've done it, and realized that after spending an awful lot of money on four speakers to your sides or rear you're not even positive you could tell the new 20x more expensive surrounds from the old ones in a blind test, even though when you compare them as main speakers the spectral balance, image rendition, and dynamic reproduction of the new ones are all beyond question superior...
As someone who has done it, I have to agree. I spent a lot of money on a matching set of 5 speakers from the Canadian company, Totem. This was in the days when I seemed to have some sort of belief in 'audiophile' speakers, although I am embarrassed to admit it now. The sound was very good though. Then, for various reasons to do with reconfiguring the room, I had to replace the surround pair of Totems and I chose some small, inexpensive speakers from a British company which isn't well known, or known at all in the USA. And guess what? After running XT32, I couldn’t detect any audible difference between these small, cheap speakers and the 5 times more expensive Totems, for surround duties.
More recently, to go with my M&K S150s across the front, I have used M&K SS150T Tripoles, which are fairly expensive but I wanted the tripole concept. Those speakers were wonderful as surrounds, but clearly they are not identical to the mains and also the great sound had little to do with 'timbre matching' and a lot to do with the tripole concept in my room.
Now, in preparation for Atmos, I have sold the Tripoles and relocated my surrounds to 110° and changed them to some MK Sound M7s, which aren't cheap and aren't expensive. And lately I have been thinking of replacing those with some dual concentrics.