Surround Sound speaker size make a huge difference?

[the machine]

I purchased the Klipsch F30 yesterday and am going to pair up some rears and possibly surrounds and complete a 7.1 set up.

I'm finding the s10 and s20 to be about $150 difference in price. Am I going to notice a huge difference in a 5.25 vs a 4" speaker, especially if it is used as a surround sound speaker. I'm going to use bookshelf speakers for the rears.

On a side note, how would mounting these up high sound, angled downward? There are only 3 walls in the room, and because of window placement the right side of the room is open, so if I make it a 7 speaker system the surrouds will have to be mounted high on the wall/trim (theres about 7 inches of wall coming from the ceiling separating the two rooms)

 

[theJman]

A lot of it would depend upon the size of your room and how close you'll be to the surrounds. For HT the front 3 speakers perform the lions share of the work, so the surrounds aren't nearly as critical as those. The F30's are pretty decent sized speakers though, so it finances allow you might want to consider the S20.

 

[walter duque]

Yes they do. Buy the best you can afford. Rear sound stage is just as important as your fronts.

 

[herbu]

Yes they do. Buy the best you can afford. Rear sound stage is just as important as your fronts.

the machine, first you should listen to walter.
But I will tell you that in my limited experience, the point of diminishing return is reached sooner with your surrounds than with your mains. I have 4 matching towers for my fronts and l/r surrounds, (then much smaller speakers for my rear surrounds in a 7.2). The fronts and center are magnificent. TV, movies, and music are great. The truth in my case is that the l/r surrounds are under utilized. The capability of the towers far exceeds their use as surrounds in TV/movies. They sound great, but I'm not at all sure I need that much speaker for the occasional surround sound effect.

Now, the speakers I'm talking about are $1k each. When you get in the $500/pair neighborhood, you might be well below the point of diminishing return, and $150 could make a big difference. If the S20s are only $150 more than the discontinued S10s, I would go w/ the 20s.

 

[markw]

It kind of depends. If your main usage is for home theatre then it's not too critical as the surrounds are generally called upon for occasional directional clues and ambiance effects. A full range isn't really that critical.

but, if you want to play music through them often then you would want them to be fully capable of handling whatever music you throw at them. A sub can take some of the onus off them but they should still be able to handle the bulk of the normal musical range on their own. Basically, if you want to use 'em for music often, see how they sound alone playing two-channel music before you decide.

 

[walter duque]

They sound great, but I'm not at all sure I need that much speaker for the occasional surround sound effect.

You might be right on that quote, but to me the occasional surround effect is well worth the extra cost. When I watch Pearl Harbor or the Flight of the Phoenix I get that rush and as long as I am happy it's money well spend.

 

[lsiberian]

Surrounds aren't as critical in home theater as fronts.

 

[herbu]

...the occasional surround effect is well worth the extra cost. When I watch Pearl Harbor or the Flight of the Phoenix I get that rush and as long as I am happy it's money well spend.

Agree! Yet how many people have exactly the same speakers for their surrounds as their mains?
The point I tried to convey to the OP was that the $150 upgrade was probably advisable for his surrounds... but "the best you can afford" should be prioritized lower than his mains. Agree?

 

[walter duque]

Surrounds aren't as critical in home theater as fronts.

When I go to fuzz's house (and we know what he's packing) besides all the subs and that amazing front stage he has it's the surrounds that grab my attention. His system sounds better then any IMAX I've ever been to. It's not just the size of the rears it's the quality.

 

[the machine]

Thanks for all the input. Walter, I'm not talking about rear LR speakers. Those will be book shelf, b-20. Maybe it still doesn't matter much and the s20 might be much better, but is it 2 times better? Maybe it's opinion.

This may throw a twist in, but if I skimp a bit on surrounds maybe I will put a bit more into a center channel. C-20 vs rc 42ii? Only about. $70 difference.

 

[the machine]

Or aside from an rc 42, I found an rc 62 ii on CL for $300. Will this not pair well being a different line???

 

[walter duque]

Agree! Yet how many people have exactly the same speakers for their surrounds as their mains?
The point I tried to convey to the OP was that the $150 upgrade was probably advisable for his surrounds... but "the best you can afford" should be prioritized lower than his mains. Agree?

Good point. If I go by retail (which I never pay anyway) 4 surrounds are the same price as the 2 towers.