2. home-theater
  3. 123196-96

Have a better suggestion for HT audio?

I'm building a relatively modest HT system in my family room, so size and WAF are big factors in my choices.  My sonic preferences run toward neutral, but my biggest must have is a center channel that's not much higher than 7" tall and that has the juice to believably produce heft, especially in the lower mids (think being able to credibly and accurately portray Darth Vader's voice).  Also needs to have good dispersion so people around the room largely hear the same quality center sound.  Second priority is tight and impactful bass that will let me feel the rumble of effects in my chest at least to some degree, although room shaking bass is not a requirement, and size is definitely a limiting factor here.  Third priority is a relatively seamless sound across the front 3 speakers.  Room is 23' x 13.5' with 8' ceilings and has open archways to other rooms on two walls.  Budget is roughly $2000 new or used (already have TV).  I'm mostly a 2-channel guy but dabble in HT, so would be interested in your recommendations here.  This is what I'm currently thinking of going with.  I'm fairly certain I'll be happy with this setup from a sonic, size, and WAF standpoint, but if you guys have better suggestions given my priorities I'm all ears.  Thanks in advance. 

Front L/R/C
Aperion Intimus 5C and 4T -- strong bias to center with tweeter mounted above mid or mid woof.  Prefer small and thin floorstanders to monitors due to little ones running around and very limited space. 

Surrounds
Gallo Nucleus -- due to WAF cannot have small rectangular boxes hanging in back corners of the room.  Little white balls might go over better.  Trying to avoid in ceiling but may go that route so options welcome.  Would probably just go with Intimus in ceilings if I do that. 

Sub
SVS SB1000 -- a 13" cube is about all I can cram into our spot (hence the sealed box design), but may stretch to SB2000 if added bass foundation would meaningfully up the HT experience. 

AVR
Yamaha RXV479 -- this pretty much has all the features, reliability, and sound quality I'm currently looking for, but might stretch to RXV679 if it's significantly more future proof and/or offers some useful features I might be overlooking.  Particularly I'm thinking about it having 3 HDMI 2.2 inputs with the 679 instead of only 1 as in the 479, although not sure if I need more than 1 if I'm not planning on doing Blu Ray. 

Sorry for for the long post but just wanted to give you guys all the pertinent info to work with.  Looking forward to your thoughts and recommendations. 



soix
soix OP
9,456 posts
 
Thanks again tls.  Makes sense.  If the minimum impedance was listed as 6 Ohms I'd still give the Yamaha a fighting chance.  But the fact that they list impedance as 6 Ohms makes me think it dips to 4 or maybe even lower at some point in the frequency range, in which case I have no doubt you're correct.  I really wish speaker manufacturers were required to state minimum impedance and the frequency at which it occurs.  Nominal impedance is just a useless statistic.
elevick
2,636 posts
 
Personally, I don't think matching the rears is so important.  For that matter, you might want to skip rears for now.  Once the wife gets used to what she sees/hears then you can add them.  Plus, running wires to the rears can be a nightmare.  The Gallos are nice but they are not a true dipole surround.

I'd opt for a Marantz over Yamaha.  It will drive everything better.  Yamahas don't like lower impedances and it is dead on above about the power outputs dropping.  You have to remember that the peak ratings will get pushed if watching a movie even if your average listening is 1 watt.

You are totally correct about wanting seamless matching across your front three.  This should include matching the heights as much as possible.  Are you going to put the center on the TV stand or wall mount it?

Finally, the SVS is good.  There's a ton of choices out there in subs.  Buy on Audiogon and save.
soix OP
9,456 posts
 
Thanks Elevick.  Exactly what I was thinking regarding the rears.  Really like the Intimus 5c so I'm going to start looking into AVRs with a more robust power supply.  Center will be on TV stand, and the 4t tweeter and upper mid woof will basically be level with the 5c, which along with small size is why I chose them.  Thanks again. 

tls49's avatar
tls49
1,351 posts
 

"Personally, I don't think matching the rears is so important."

elevick, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Besides the link I provided on matching front and rear, here's another one you should read, especially the last line.

http://www.avtruths.com/speaker.html

From the experience I mentioned in a previous post, I have heard more HT than most people. No doubt the best sound is achieved with all identical speakers. As sound moves through the room or sound is being created by 2 adjacent speakers (possibly on L or R side using front and rear speakers), the blend is absolutely seamless through the entire room, and speakers disappear. Timbre matching comes close, but still not quite as good as all identical. Mixing brands degrades even more. We use matched speakers for a 2 channel system, so it just makes sense to use matched speakers in a multi channel system.



soix OP
9,456 posts
 
Started looking at receivers.  The comparably priced Marantz only puts out 50WPC, which probably won't cut it if I go with the Aperion speakers.  However, the Onkyo TX-NR646 looks particularly interesting.  Puts out 80WPC with 5 channels driven, and it offers more HDCP 2.2 HDMI inputs and video processing for not much more money than the RXV479.  Thanks for getting me to explore AVRs further. 
More to discover