Where are the BIG center channels?

[gaby95]

Correct, I am the only one.

I figured...

 

[gaby95]

There is a balance point. I agree with Shady on the technical side. So much comes down to use case and what is actually needed in-room.
There is a part of me though that believes in following best practices to achieve the best results in-room. It is in this where I lean toward a proper upright matching Speaker or a well designed horizontal 3-way Center. To me, with basic understanding of the design concepts, it becomes an easy matter of making the choice that is right for you.
I do wish that the designers and manufacturers would take further steps to mitigate potential issues, and frankly think that these companies should make available their own testing. I do not believe that some of these companies are incapable of getting their Speakers tested prior to finalizing and producing their line. These companies know what educated consumers are after and should take it a step further and design for this while helping educate other customers in a constructive manner as to why "this" design is the best they can put forth.
At the same time, I wish consumers would stop copping out and putting silly demands on Speaker manufacturers. "I bought this entertainment unit that can only hold a 5" h x 13" w x 8" d center." F that! "Why the hell did you buy furniture before you knew what equipment you were going to invest in for your home entertainment?


ASR does tend to go too far on one the side... this I agree, but not everybody there does. There is of course this version of that thread over there, and somebody commenting that even if the same drivers and same XO work is being utilized, the radiation pattern will change the Speaker so significantly as to no longer being an appropriate match.

Again... Best Practices.

We do what we can, when we can, to get the best performance possible. We need to stop making silly convenience choices if SQ matters most.

And that is the problem indeed..it seems SQ takes a back seat to other things when it comes to the center like, lets keep the height small so it fit inside a cabinet or does not block the TV...etc. Compromises that affect the main thing the center speaker is supposed to be doing...make clear dialogue and sound to a wider area. Going MTM goes against that very idea from the start.

 

[ryanosaur]

Going MTM goes against that very idea from the start.

Forgive, as I am not intending to sound so argumentative...

Why so absolutist about MTMs?
I don't recommend them, but would be willing to try one if it made sense in my use case. If it doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work for you. *shrugs
End of story.
If it works for somebody else, then it works for somebody else.

 

[gaby95]

Forgive, as I am not intending to sound so argumentative...

Why so absolutist about MTMs?
I don't recommend them, but would be willing to try one if it made sense in my use case. If it doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work for you. *shrugs
End of story.
If it works for somebody else, then it works for somebody else.

Because I have tested MANY MANY MANY, and science and measurements do not lie. I get surprised when people react to lobing issues as if it was this odd mythical thing that only a few think it exists. It is just science, it is real, measurable and audible (or in most cases is the part that you get NOT to actually hear anymore the big problem).
If someone want to use a 2way then go for it.. what bothers me is when they try to push products that are flawed to others in some sort of confirmation bias.
If MTM works for you, enjoy.
Regards

 

[ryanosaur]

Because I have tested MANY MANY MANY, and science and measurements do not lie. I get surprised when people react to lobing issues as if it was this odd mythical thing that only a few think it exists. It is just science, it is real, measurable and audible (or in most cases is the part that you get NOT to actually hear anymore the big problem).
If someone want to use a 2way then go for it.. what bothers me is when they try to push products that are flawed to others in some sort of confirmation bias.
If MTM works for you, enjoy.
Regards

Since I don't use a horizontal MTM, and avoid recommending them, I'm in pretty good shape. I'm not really interested in advocating for the devil or anyone else.

Nowhere have I said you are wrong. On the contrary, I've largely agreed with you. The breakdown seems to be that you take a much more absolutist stance whereas I am willing to accept that, for some instances, a well designed and implemented Horizontal MTM can do the job asked of it.

What I may be missing is where someone actually recommends a poorly designed MTM or MMTMM, here. I recall that RBH mtmtmtm popping up yesterday(?). Admittedly, I would be interested in seeing measurements for that as it is a very unique design concept. RBH is usually pretty well on top of their designs, though.
It wouldn't be my first choice unless I saw some convincing proof of concept. *shrugs

 

[Danzilla31]

I figured...

Dude @shadyJ is the tester here at audioholics he not only has subjective experience but empirical data to back it up.

His testing methods are as spot on as Amirs

Even Amir will tell you certain measurements arent audible or with center channels an issue if you adjust to the data presented and its workable that way in your room and for your listening needs

I've used MTM and other types of centers. You can measure a difference and if your sitting far enough off axis you can hear a difference. But if I'm sitting in a one sweet spot room on axis I've never been able to tell that much of a difference.

But really to each his own I wouldn't recommend an MTM center but sometimes either due to price or other factors a buyer sometimes has no choice. As long as they are sitting on axis with it and understand that's where it will work best if that's what they need to do that's what they need to do

 

[gaby95]

Dude @shadyJ is the tester here at audioholics he not only has subjective experience but empirical data to back it up.

Dude..good for him but that has ZERO to do with the topic. MTM is a TERRIBLE design for a center speaker or are you going to deny that?
There is no arguing that. Depending on how bad the off-axis and how your setup is, that off-axis can have a big impact on your on-axis as well.
But sure, if you are on-axis then MTM could be fine but I will argue, for that I may as well go with Phantom instead.
In any case I am not gonna keep beating a dead horse. MTM is a bad choice and a compromise to meet cheap, simple design where SQ takes a back seat.

I am out of this thread.

 

[Golfx]

Dude..good for him but that has ZERO to do with the topic. MTM is a TERRIBLE design for a center speaker or are you going to deny that?
There is no arguing that. Depending on how bad the off-axis and how your setup is, that off-axis can have a big impact on your on-axis as well.
But sure, if you are on-axis then MTM could be fine but I will argue, for that I may as well go with Phantom instead.
In any case I am not gonna keep beating a dead horse. MTM is a bad choice and a compromise to meet cheap, simple design where SQ takes a back seat.

I am out of this thread.

I think your intensity will not be missed.

 

[Mark E. Long]

I think every center ever made is a compromise some are good some not so much . Most do there job in an individual’s room most of us probably don’t have dedicated theater rooms so compromise most be made . In my room it would be pretty hard to set far enough off axis to get 30 degrees off center at 12 feet away . With my new center I use I looked at specs that had mabey the flattest response I could find and also to future proof matching with getting new mains to match . The specs say it’s average at best 30 off axis but integrated into the system as a whole it’s the best I’ve had or herd for a stand alone center . It’s big unreal clear and definitely locks the dialogue in place it integrated easily into my system I did have to spread the mains apart about a foot more and toe in a little more but it’s great on movies, concerts . My cabinet is almost unlimited in how high I can raise the tv so it’s never a placement problem to fit any center heck I could lay a tower on its side under the tv . Is there better no question does this one preform absolutely .

 

[XTex]

I was just looking at the Paradigm Premiere 600C, a nice big center, 3 way design, but I suspect with so many drivers it probably will have some issues potentially, so was looking for some measurements to see what the 0 to 30 degree SPL response across the range would be like.

Some 2.5 ways seem to measure ok, like some of the coaxial based ones such as KEF. But not a lot do this, so they're limited. And even less comprehensive measurements.

Very best,

Only 2 of those horizontal 6.5" ones are actual drivers. The outer ones are just passive bass radiators. Consider it a fancy-looking typical 3-way center.

 

[MalVeauX]

Only 2 of those horizontal 6.5" ones are actual drivers. The outer ones are just passive bass raidators. Consider it a fancy-looking typical 3-way center.

Still, would really like to see some measurements for SPL at 0* and 30* degree ranges and linearity of response.

Very best,

 

[TLS Guy]

I think every center ever made is a compromise some are good some not so much . Most do there job in an individual’s room most of us probably don’t have dedicated theater rooms so compromise most be made . In my room it would be pretty hard to set far enough off axis to get 30 degrees off center at 12 feet away . With my new center I use I looked at specs that had mabey the flattest response I could find and also to future proof matching with getting new mains to match . The specs say it’s average at best 30 off axis but integrated into the system as a whole it’s the best I’ve had or herd for a stand alone center . It’s big unreal clear and definitely locks the dialogue in place it integrated easily into my system I did have to spread the mains apart about a foot more and toe in a little more but it’s great on movies, concerts . My cabinet is almost unlimited in how high I can raise the tv so it’s never a placement problem to fit any center heck I could lay a tower on its side under the tv . Is there better no question does this one preform absolutely .

My center is NO compromise. The answer is to make coaxial centers the rule. Centers should be built round coaxial drivers, or full rangers. Then you can mount them vertical or horizontal or any other angle you wish.

This is the axis, and off axis response of my center. There is uniform coverage over the whole listening area The design is a TL and totally devoid of any boxy quality in the lower voice range. Speech is not only clear but natural. I have never heard a better center, not even close.
The audio industry is obtuse. This is a solvable problem both acoustically and aesthetically, and I can prove it!

Axis response.

Off axis response all the way to outside of the listening area,

 

[Danzilla31]

I think your intensity will not be missed.

Yeah for reals I wasn't trying to poke the dude but the thread topic was where are the big center channels @ParleyW posted a really big center channel. The guy just has to critic it with something we all know but Parley is correctly sitting right in front of it. We start having a friendly conversation about MTM's tho @shadyJ chips in the guy goes postal on poor Shady. I'm like damn who pissed in your Wheaties today?

It's okay Shady just hit him over the head with a really big center channel your testing

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I dont see it any more toxic than most forums. Every forum has an AVSFORUM Zorba.. LOL
The sad reality is that many center speakers are simply bad and they dont sugar coat it at ASR. The data is provided so you can interpret it yourself if you prefer and in the end, I have tested speakers that have tested badly just to find out for myself if they were speakers that I was really wanting to work for my needs.

Regards

Lmao!
Yes. Zorba922 is a total dikkhead.

 

[XTex]

Still, would really like to see some measurements for SPL at 0* and 30* degree ranges and linearity of response.

Very best,

No disagreement here. I actually got to listen to one a while back and while it sounded good overall, even at the 20-30° off-axis I could get, it didn't make me want to drop $1000. Really hard to say definitively though as it wasn't in my room and if don't know how they had it calibrated.

 

[Mark E. Long]

My center is NO compromise. The answer is to make coaxial centers the rule. Centers should be built round coaxial drivers, or full rangers. Then you can mount them vertical or horizontal or any other angle you wish.

This is the axis, and off axis response of my center. There is uniform coverage over the whole listening area The design is a TL and totally devoid of any boxy quality in the lower voice range. Speech is not only clear but natural. I have never heard a better center, not even close.
The audio industry is obtuse. This is a solvable problem both acoustically and aesthetically, and I can prove it!

Axis response.

Off axis response all the way to outside of the listening area,

Yes I’ve often thought after all the reviews I’ve read and centers I’ve tried wouldn’t a single speaker in a box really work like KEF’s one single coaxial driver as an example or one’s own design .

 

[JDM]

Another one that’s more expensive not mentioned is the Revel C426be!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lovinthehd]

Another one that’s more expensive not mentioned is the Revel C426be! View attachment 56008


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd sure like to try those....but no way with the L/R speakers that close....hope that's simply a photo op thing.

 

[ryanosaur]

That Revel Center came up earlier... pg 4 maybe?

 

[Pandaman617]

My Paradigm CC570 v3 uses two 7” woofers, a 4” midrange and 1” tweeter with dual rear mounted ports. It’s not the biggest CC I’ve ever had but it weighs over 60lbs.