I've been last months researching for a fine versatile 50/50 music/HT5.1 setup. Room 18'x13', 7' viewing distance, max budget 5k euro. 2k for receiver, 1k for sub, and 2k for HT speakers.
At first, looking for a best value, this was my final projected setup:
Fronts: Focal
Chorus 826 W (floorstandings)
Rest: central and surround bipolar speakers same line as the fronts.
Sub:
Rythmik F15HP Direct Servo (sealed, 600w)
Receiver: Denon AVR-4311
(Audyssey MultEQ XT32)
But then, I read some site about the pro active monitors, and started looking info for that posibilty as an alternative, since some readings suggesting it offers a higher value vs most HiFi gear, with a good frequency response and dedicated amping, overrall best bang for the buck.
So I looked up for an alternative setup with active monitors replacing the avr with a pre/pro; I liked the Adams A8X by the reviews and price/performance ratio,
Fronts & center: 3x
Adam A8X
Surrounds: 2x
Adam A5X
Sub: same model as previous setup, Rythmik F15HP.
Processor: onkyo PR-SC5508
(Audyssey MultEQ XT32)
I mainly concerned with the common attached cons on monitors for home 5.1 audio enjoyment, like the bright clinical sound, fatigue on ears, and off-axis behavious worse than HiFi speakers.
At a 7' viewing distance, a sofa area for 2-3 places, would it be too wider for a good listening with monitors? since its said monitors to have a very picky sweet-spot, would it be a big compromise for 2-3 listeners?
Anyone using monitors for its HT setup? do you think one of this choices looks better or seems a better value over the other?
Any input would be much appreciated.
