Rear surround suggestion to match M&K system

[Fierce Mice]

I recently added an old pair of 2 ohm wharfedale diamonds as rear-channel surrounds to my home theater, and have been happy with the results until this weekend. I'm running 3 M&K S-150 up front and two M&K SS-150 for the side surrounds from a Denon 5800. However, I think the 2 ohm load finally made the receiver beg for mercy after some extended listening at louder than normal levels. Fortunately the receiver went into protect mode (i.e. suddenly shut off) instead of sacrificing itself to meet my demands...but it made me realize my cheap, quick fix (I had the Wharfedales already) may not be ideal.

I use the system for 80% HT, 20% music, but don't play SACD or DVD Audio , so the surround function I use (if any) is DTS Neo.

Can anyone suggest some cost-effective alternatives that will blend with this system? Does the rear surround really NEED to blend?

If I left out pertinent info you need to make a suggestion, let me know and I'll edit it in!

 

[Johnd]

Can't help you with your first question, as I've never heard M&K's or Wharfdales. But as far as your second question, timbre matching is not necessary on the surrounds, except for the sides, and then only in SACD with the most discriminating listener (assuming you have good matches to begin with). Nice receiver selection, by the way (I've got the 5803). Denon rocks!

 

[AVRat]

Cost-effective $$$? Polarity preference? Yup, nice receiver.

 

[Fierce Mice]

I was originally going to bite the bullet and buy 2 more SS-150, as I really like the tripole design / sound of the other surrounds / lack of concern re: compatability. But, they're pricey, and I'm trying to get the wife onboard for a new TV (see sig ).

With patience, I could get the pair for $750, and I definitely wouldn't want to spend 50% of the price for what I want on a poor substitute! I was thinking $250 / pr, and would want them to be mountable on my rear wall (with Omnimount 20.0).

Polarity? Hmm. I was planning on using non-dipole (either direct-radiators or bipoles) surround speakers but could be coerced differently with an effective argument against that plan =)

Room size/ characteristics: Pretty big20 x 25 adjoining the kitchen island / kitchen. Bright! Both sonically and luminously. Tile floors, 2 brick walls, 1 wall of glass (sliding glass doors). I'm holding off on room treatments until the furnishings are done, including built-in bookshelves / TV / AV stand and rack.

I love the 5800, it's been the upgrade I've made (so far) with the least regret!

 

[Jack Hammer]

You could put a smaller and more affordable speaker from M&K in the rear surround position. Those speakers don't get a huge amount of play so you might be able to get away with the smaller speaker. Try the K5's or K7's. Or if you want tripole surrounds the K4's go for around $350 on ebay. Or even the surround 550's, they use the same tweeter as your s-150's and I've seen them on ebay for around $300.

Otherwise, you could just pick up a separate amp and keep what you are currently using. uBid has refurbished audiosource amp100's listed for $60 about once a month. It's not a high power, high end amp, but it should be adequate for surround rears.

BTW, nice speakers. That is the setup I originally wanted, but couldn't afford.

 

[Sheep]

Can't help you with your first question, as I've never heard M&K's or Wharfdales. But as far as your second question, timbre matching is not necessary on the surrounds....

Actually, that is incorrect. The surrounds don't have to match the fronts, but they have to match eachother.

The most logical solution to your problem is to buy 2 more SS-150s. If you can't/don't want to do this then find a pair of speakers that fits your price range that sounds the same.

SheepStar

 

[Johnd]

Actually, that is incorrect. The surrounds don't have to match the fronts, but they have to match eachother.SheepStar

UNTRUE. Unbelievable! Not really...some people just like to hear themselves speak. I don't know precisely what you're disagreeing with, but you assume too much if you infer that I meant you could match a Paradigm minimonitor left surround with a B&W 602 right surround, and be pleased with the results.

I simply made the following statement, and stand by it:
Timbre-matching is not necessary with the surrounds (to the fronts or center. I ommitted this statement, but this is a reasonable inference). But this assumes you "have good matches to begin with."

Although ideal, side surrounds and rear surrounds do not have to match each other, assuming they are "good matches to begin with." This is all academic for those who are purchasing entire surround systems at once...why would you not match the rears with the sides? I can think of no logical reason other than 1) economic, in which case, I would submit to wait until one can afford to match the system, or, 2) space, in which case, if you're looking at in-wall or in-ceiling (for the rears, but not the sides), this entire discussion is moot.

The clear intent of my statement was for those who are shopping for rears and are trying to match their already discontinued sides. This point has been argued to death, and I stand fast that rears need not timbre-match the sides (in your words, "they have to match each other"), assuming that they are good matches/mates to the sides, as well as the mains and center. But I take for granted that this was assumed by all to begin with. Who would be so foolish as to meld some overly-bright Cerwin-Vegas mains with a very warm Aperion center, or surrounds, for that matter. But I'm sure it happens.

Absolutes and incorrect corrections is a sure-fire way to instigate a match (as you did with P****, I will not speak his name). My suggestion is this: rather than writing:

"Actually, that is incorrect. The surrounds don't have to match the fronts, but they have to match eachother.", it would be less confrontational, and far more accurate to write:

"Actually, I disagree. The surrounds don't have to match the fronts, but it is best they do, as well as match each other."

Just my $0.02 worth of wisdom for the day.

 

[Fierce Mice]

The most logical solution to your problem is to buy 2 more SS-150s. If you can't/don't want to do this then find a pair of speakers that fits your price range that sounds the same.

SheepStar

Hard to argue that =) Of course, the purpose of this thread is to try to gather the colllective knowledge of the forum and a) see if anyone else faced with this problem found an inexpensive speaker that THEY were pleased with or b) see if anyone had a speaker in the aforementioned price range that THEY found to be a decent match for the M&Ks.

Then of course, it's up to me to audition the recommended speakers and decide if the trade off in price is worth the (assumed) inferior sound of a non M&K speaker (EDIT: when used with the other M&K speakers: I'm not saying all other speakers are inferior to M&K!!!).

I suppose if I wanted to, I could, as you recommended, find a pair of speakers in my price range that sounds the same, but the subset of speakers that fits this requirement is large enough that by the time I finished looking at all possible options, I COULD afford to go out and buy the M&Ks I want. Unfortunately, at this time my wallet will not allow the wanton consumerism that the boy in me wishes to pursue!

I'll definitely look into some of the other M&K speakers, but will likely live with what I have until I can afford to buy what I want (I hate buying the same thing twice because I was impatient).

I appreciate the feedback and look forward to seeing what other sage advice I'll get =)