AVS Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've had it suggested to me that (since I'm looking for speakers to fit behind my AT screen) I might consider using 3 center channels across the front.


Does anyone have an opinion on this? My initial reaction is that this is a bad idea, but I have nothing to back that up.


The suggestion was to use 3x Paradigm Studio CC-590 as I'm a fan of the Paradigm Studio line.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,781 Posts
Center channels in general are a compromise. The CC590 is pretty good in that it uses a vertically arranged midrange and tweeter with woofers on the sides which helps with off axis response compared to a woofer-tweeter-woofer combination but still not as good as a vertically arranged bookshelf or tower speaker.


3 identical front spacers all at ear height is the way to go with an AT screen. 3 Studio 20's would be a better choice than 3 CC590s. You could also use 3 Studio 60's or 100's if you prefer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Your thinking is on the right track. Or maybe a parallel track... You are correct in thinking that three of the exact same speaker for your front three is a good idea. You hear so much talk on AVS about timbre matching the front three, and speaker line "families" etc... but the ideal situation is identical speakers. There ain't nothin better timbre matched than the same speaker.


But...


Rather than three center channels, you should be using three "regular" bookshelves/floorstanders. The traditional center channel design (tweeter in the center, and midrange on either side) is already a design compromise, in order to make a horizontal configuration for placement above or beneath a TV. With an AT projection screen, you aren't limited to a horizontally-configured center.


Placing a center channel on its vertical axis does improve things somewhat, but I don't understand the reasoning ... taking less-than-ideal horizontally configured speakers, and turning them 90 degrees ... why not just use bookshelves or floorstanders that are designed to be in that position?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,343 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy91 /forum/post/20866787


We need to play NOW and LOUD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,174 Posts
That's what I do with Hsu centre speakers and it works well (great horizontal dispersion with the drivers lined up vertically). You have to remember to rotate the horn or waveguide (if the speaker has one) 90 degrees.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,781 Posts
The CC590 he is referring already has a midrange (4.5") and a tweeter (1") placed vertically and then 2 woofers (7"), one on each side of the midrange tweeter array. This speaker you would not want to place in the vertical orientation. For speakers that are MTM (midrange-tweeter-midgrange) I agree that placing it vertically would be benificial but not this particular speaker.


If you do use 3 of these you have to place them horizontally as designed. However, the Studio 20 bookshelf speakers would be a better choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hey all,


Thanks for the feedback.. I'm not in a position to use floorstanders (I have a thread looking for suggestions here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1352772 ) because the bottom of my AT screen frame will end up obscuring 1 or 2 drivers in some fashion.


I considered the Studio 20s, but a rep at Paradigm was concerned I wouldn't be as happy with the sound based on the size of my room. It was he who suggested using the 590s across the front. I'd like to think it's not just because they're more expensive.



The 60s and 100s would both have a driver blocked by the screen, unfortunately. At any rate, I'm not _stuck_ on Paradigm.. I just like their sound. That's why my other thread was cruising for suggestions. However, it sounds like the opinion here is that (for the 590s) this would be less than ideal.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top