Banned
Joined 2002
mod note: This thread split off from here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1383148#post1383148 chrisb said:
Not every one is as picky as you Chris, The Sony HTIB's are great machines for people who don't want to spend so much $$$$ on a system to get sound for their tv or dvd.
I set these things up all day and they are perfect for their application.
Food for thought tho.!
Banned
Joined 2002
planet10 said:
It's not a HIFI device it's a home theater in a box to get you the experience you want for a good price.
you can't get the home theater experiance from 2 speakers, It will sound worse if any thing on just 2 speakers. DVD's and Blue-ray- hd-dvds are now all encoded for 5 or more speakers plus a sub.
Banned
Joined 2002
On another note, what would be the point ?
Id see both you and chris point your nose to the air and provide **** poor comments,
A) because you didn't design it, its garbage,
B) because you didn't build it its also garbage.
There is no point in showing you guys stuff your nose is out of joint at the first sight of some one elses idea / product. If you didn't build it or design it, it's garbage.. Good reason for me to leave the audio scene and quit showing you things.
The only person that i see that has a true audio spirit that i have truly met would be Scott, never talks behind ones back and never comments to hurt some ones feelings.
he keeps it to him self if he does comment.
Plain and simple, sounds like a good way to continue life right ?
Id see both you and chris point your nose to the air and provide **** poor comments,
A) because you didn't design it, its garbage,
B) because you didn't build it its also garbage.
There is no point in showing you guys stuff your nose is out of joint at the first sight of some one elses idea / product. If you didn't build it or design it, it's garbage.. Good reason for me to leave the audio scene and quit showing you things.
The only person that i see that has a true audio spirit that i have truly met would be Scott, never talks behind ones back and never comments to hurt some ones feelings.
he keeps it to him self if he does comment.
Plain and simple, sounds like a good way to continue life right ?
Banned
Joined 2002
Jason, this is the last straw - you really need to learn some manners , and attempt to understand the context of a post before spouting off.
pot = kettle = black
Yes, I know you're now installing HT equipment - does that make you an expert on what other people hear, or denigrate the quality of sound that some of us with longer experience than your life span can achieve with a more modest array of equipment?
Let me tell this particular story over again - my sister specifically asked me (two Christmases in a row) me to help her set up her "HTIB" system, as she wasn't happy with many aspects of its performance - not the least of which was the limited listening area.
The room in which this system is located is approx 15ft wide by 22ft long, extending an additional 20ft or so into a kitchen/dining area- vaulted ceiling that is 16ft at the peak.
The 60in projection TV and 5.1 channel speaker array was focused on a couch along one of the long walls of the room - i.e. firing across the short dimension of the room.
Her request was two fold - where should I put the speakers, and how can I get a fuller sound, over a larger area.
Suggesting a better location (near the corners of the the short, end wall) for a single pair of speakers, that yes I built from a design published on Dave's website and which was modeled by Scottmoose (i.e the Brynn BVR), and driving it with a very nice little amplifier of relatively modest power - the Kingrex T20U Class T, Julie was very happy with the sound.
She's lived in this house for over 20yrs, and quite enthusiastically claims this is the best sound she's had there yet. As you might imagine, being my sister, she's had occasion to hear quite a few combinations of equipment over the past several decades, and she knows what she hears.
I dare say that any DIYer who builds a pair of speakers that put such a smile one someone's face and had them reaching for their chequebook, would be happy to share the news.
The fact the speaker in question is a Fostex based (4") single driver system, and that some listeners are fed up with the HT multi-channel hype and associated specialized set-up and are quite happy with only 2 channels puts a smile on my face.
Are there enough customers in the retail market yet eager for the full HT sensory
experience, at whatever their respective budgets may allow?
absolutely
Will their demands keep installers such as yourself employed for the foreseeable future?
why not?
Last time I looked, the name of this forum was DIY, and this thread more specifically devoted to FullRange not HTIB.
Will the DIYers interested in following a different path continue to speak their mind when they hear something that sounds like krap, regardless of the nameplate or price tag?
damned right they will.
we've heard that before
pot = kettle = black
Yes, I know you're now installing HT equipment - does that make you an expert on what other people hear, or denigrate the quality of sound that some of us with longer experience than your life span can achieve with a more modest array of equipment?
Let me tell this particular story over again - my sister specifically asked me (two Christmases in a row) me to help her set up her "HTIB" system, as she wasn't happy with many aspects of its performance - not the least of which was the limited listening area.
The room in which this system is located is approx 15ft wide by 22ft long, extending an additional 20ft or so into a kitchen/dining area- vaulted ceiling that is 16ft at the peak.
The 60in projection TV and 5.1 channel speaker array was focused on a couch along one of the long walls of the room - i.e. firing across the short dimension of the room.
Her request was two fold - where should I put the speakers, and how can I get a fuller sound, over a larger area.
Suggesting a better location (near the corners of the the short, end wall) for a single pair of speakers, that yes I built from a design published on Dave's website and which was modeled by Scottmoose (i.e the Brynn BVR), and driving it with a very nice little amplifier of relatively modest power - the Kingrex T20U Class T, Julie was very happy with the sound.
She's lived in this house for over 20yrs, and quite enthusiastically claims this is the best sound she's had there yet. As you might imagine, being my sister, she's had occasion to hear quite a few combinations of equipment over the past several decades, and she knows what she hears.
I dare say that any DIYer who builds a pair of speakers that put such a smile one someone's face and had them reaching for their chequebook, would be happy to share the news.
The fact the speaker in question is a Fostex based (4") single driver system, and that some listeners are fed up with the HT multi-channel hype and associated specialized set-up and are quite happy with only 2 channels puts a smile on my face.
Are there enough customers in the retail market yet eager for the full HT sensory
experience, at whatever their respective budgets may allow?
absolutely
Will their demands keep installers such as yourself employed for the foreseeable future?
why not?
Last time I looked, the name of this forum was DIY, and this thread more specifically devoted to FullRange not HTIB.
Will the DIYers interested in following a different path continue to speak their mind when they hear something that sounds like krap, regardless of the nameplate or price tag?
damned right they will.
we've heard that before
ok so now that all the Christmas cheer has been aired...
here's a thought.
Who cares? On some points I do agree with jleaman, and on others I agree with dave and chris. Here's the thing:
Home Theatre generally sucks. HTIB solutions are convenient, one stop consumer level purchases. I have been surprised on how good some of these can sound if set up properly, taking the room and the setup of the receiver and loudspeakers into consideration. But they generally suck. Years ago (I think it was Robert Hartley) one of the writers from TAS or Stereophile suggested having two systems. One for Home Theatre and one for 2 channel audio. His comment was generally surround sound audio in HT is a secondary experience to watching a movie, so the quality was/is less demanding. The primary experience of listening to music is listening to music. so 2 opposing points of view from the same "expert" person. I think he's right.
Unfortunately some figure only one way is right. I didn't see any condescending comments or feel any condescending tones in Chris' or Dave's comments. And perhaps we all need to actually read the posts.
jleaman, I don't know you, nor do I have a particular axe to grind with you. Chris' comments were in a specific case regarding the situation with his sister. There are some excellent home theatre products that can make music. It's just that almost no HTIB solutions do. And the expectations regarding (generally) home theatre vs. 2 channel audio are different. chris was just sharing the comments made by his sister in the context of trying something that has better 2 channel audio performance. That's it.
Everyone lighten up and enjoy the rest of the day.
here's a thought.
Who cares? On some points I do agree with jleaman, and on others I agree with dave and chris. Here's the thing:
Home Theatre generally sucks. HTIB solutions are convenient, one stop consumer level purchases. I have been surprised on how good some of these can sound if set up properly, taking the room and the setup of the receiver and loudspeakers into consideration. But they generally suck. Years ago (I think it was Robert Hartley) one of the writers from TAS or Stereophile suggested having two systems. One for Home Theatre and one for 2 channel audio. His comment was generally surround sound audio in HT is a secondary experience to watching a movie, so the quality was/is less demanding. The primary experience of listening to music is listening to music. so 2 opposing points of view from the same "expert" person. I think he's right.
Unfortunately some figure only one way is right. I didn't see any condescending comments or feel any condescending tones in Chris' or Dave's comments. And perhaps we all need to actually read the posts.
jleaman, I don't know you, nor do I have a particular axe to grind with you. Chris' comments were in a specific case regarding the situation with his sister. There are some excellent home theatre products that can make music. It's just that almost no HTIB solutions do. And the expectations regarding (generally) home theatre vs. 2 channel audio are different. chris was just sharing the comments made by his sister in the context of trying something that has better 2 channel audio performance. That's it.
Everyone lighten up and enjoy the rest of the day.
Just to be clear, i have no idea how the Sony Jase mentioned sounds... there are some pretty surprising low budget gear out there (ie one of the inrxpensive Panasonic 5.1 receivers with T-Amps was quite impressive). So i asked if i could hear one. Jase immediately assumes i'm going to say it doesn't sound very good... the only basis he has for that is what he thinks it sounds like, i haven't heard it.
I'm always looking for decent sounding low budget kit, and 5.1 HT receivers are certainly a valid application. It would be nice to know which ones are the stand-outs in a niche inhabited largely by drek.
dave
I'm always looking for decent sounding low budget kit, and 5.1 HT receivers are certainly a valid application. It would be nice to know which ones are the stand-outs in a niche inhabited largely by drek.
dave
MJL21193 said:I have a Yamaha 7.1... no rinkie-dink speakers though.
HT setups can sound amazing due mainly to the source. DVD audio in most movies is much more impressive than a music recording, with more dynamic range and a wider frequency range.
John, now that I've calmed down a bit, thanks for the opportunity to address the speaker question. The speaker components in this particular Sony HTIB systems would certainly qualify as rinkie-dink, and no doubt the quality of these packages can vary significantly. I'll also concede that current generations with class-T amps stages might certainly surpass the several (perhaps 5?)year old Sony.
The main point is that in this room, the 2 channel system with single driver speakers played louder, had much better and more even bass response (in spite of lacking a powered "sub"), wider listening position, and far less complicated placement considerations than the 5.1. Quite simply, not all rooms with a big screen TV are ideal for the full HT experience, and not everyone is willing to completely sacrifice the room to it.
The first DVD we played to test the spare JVC player was the movie Chicago - a fairly decent opening soundtrack, and in spite of any missing surround effects, the message survived "dance, and all that Jazz!" - and Rene sounded just as exciting coming from just two channels. I know it's just acting, but it worked for me.
chrisb said:
I have seen some funky setups, including all of those ity-bity speakers piled up on top of the TV. Surround?
Many just want it for the "sub".
As deficient as the electronics in some of these are, the "speakers" are best kept in the box. It for the masses though, they don't hear a difference.
I have people come in here and have their jaws drop off. What a difference real speakers make.
This is before I turn on my big sub...
Re: ok so now that all the Christmas cheer has been aired...
I think this is the point because generally home theatre comes with cubes and a sub (often what I'd think of as a sub-midrange rather than a sub woofer). Not that this can't be done well of course, but it is just too convenient for the commercial market to produce cheaply, I think.
Not to mention that many people just scatter them around the TV or wherever.
It is not hard to resent HT because it's motivations may seem illogical and may not be strictly necessary, and its implementations are sometimes horrible but it's hard to be objective when in this frame of mind.
If we were to do HT, (speaking for myself) I would drop the .1 from 5.1 and give the surrounds a reasonably extended response, etc. etc....and it may be quite successful, but I am already happy with stereo.
Nanook said:
I think this is the point because generally home theatre comes with cubes and a sub (often what I'd think of as a sub-midrange rather than a sub woofer). Not that this can't be done well of course, but it is just too convenient for the commercial market to produce cheaply, I think.
Not to mention that many people just scatter them around the TV or wherever.
It is not hard to resent HT because it's motivations may seem illogical and may not be strictly necessary, and its implementations are sometimes horrible but it's hard to be objective when in this frame of mind.
If we were to do HT, (speaking for myself) I would drop the .1 from 5.1 and give the surrounds a reasonably extended response, etc. etc....and it may be quite successful, but I am already happy with stereo.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.