Really? If it's a great speaker for music, then it should be a great speaker for home theater, no? Add a sub for movies... The OP did say that he wanted music.
I've been hearing this a lot lately. Well, first we are assuming a certain definition for great music speaker, and then we also have to assume that anything someone recommends fits that criteria to begin with. Me? I just use my fallible subjective ears.
For example, I find Monitor Audio BR1/2 nice for nearfield music listening. A teeny bit veiled, but a pleasant coloration. Coloration already means bad music speaker to some. If I say its a nice music speaker, which definition do we assume it fits? Probably only mine. However, if I put these into my HT system, I don't think they will comfortably handle the dynamics I would feed them. An educated guess.
I also have some very expensive hybrid electrostats. For some, they do not fit the definition of a great music speaker. For my fallible ears, they do. Which definition are we going on here? Particular sets of measurements? They are too beamy for many viewers in an HT setting, and even more so when the volumes get up there.
Maybe it CAN be so cut and dry, but Id make things clearer for the OP. my 2 cents.
My vote is 3 identical vertical speakers for the front, while trying to maintain tweeters at ear level. I find choice for surrounds is really, really secondary. If 5 identical speakers, 5x Ascend 170 SE will fit EASILY into budget. They are so far the best speakers Ive heard anywhere close to this budget. I own an almost-all PSB image setup for the HT. And as aforementioned, electrostats for the stereo. I now prefer the Ascends to my PSBs for the off-axis alone, let alone what I find so far to be even more precise imaging. Not the sexiest of cabinets, but Id get over that in a second. And that's saying something, because I thought the Images were unbeatable in value at the time of purchase.
-jostenmeat