2.0 or 3.0 or 4.0 for HT Movie Audio?


I'm simplifying my life on the audio end. Consolidation of my separate HT room and 2ch room to one room has me doing some out of the speaker-box thinking.

Just to be upfront, I do love 5.1 and this is what I would prefer, and may end up there anyways.

My question only applies to Blu Ray and DVD movie playback.

Curious if Audiogon Members have lived with and enjoyed any of these configurations, i.e.:

- 2.0 (L/R) or

- 3.0 (L/R/C) or

- 4.0 (L/R/SrL/SrR) [no center]

What have your experiences and impressions been? Any lessons learned?

Note: I'm keeping things simple by eliminating the subs; I am satisfied with the lf performance and extension I'm getting from my current speakers on movie sound tracks.

Thanks,

- David.
david_ten
My main system is 5.1 using all Gallo Reference with an Earthquake sub. It sounds glorious. My bedroom system is 3.1 using Gallo Dues (L/R) with Paradigm Center and an Infinity Sub.

The main system absolutely rocks, the Gallos are *amazing* speakers. And my 60 inch Mitsu HDTV has a fabulous picture. The system is being driven with a Butler TDB-5150 Tube/MOSFET amp which is a stellar unit. The Pre-Pro is an Emotiva UMC-1, great unit for the price ($699).

The bedroom system is much more modest, using an Onkyo multi-channel receiver to drive the Gallos and the Paradigm. CD/DVD/BluRay via Oppo BDP-83. The TV is a 32 inch Vizio. Nonetheless, I get a lot of satisfaction from this system. Especially since I have only $1500 invested in it. It would be "nice" to have some surround speakers, but the room is small and I really don't do any critical listening there. For what I use it for, it suffices quite well...

-RW-
Our system is 5.1, but 4.1 seems to work just as well. We project onto a 100" screen, and the voices seems to come from the speakers' respective locations with just the L/R mains. I think it's important to match the voicing of whatever speakers you do use. We use the same system for 2.1 and 5.1 music as well as HT, letting the source determine the number of speakers that receive input. Our sources are CD/SACD from a Sony XA5400ES, DVD & Blu-ray from a PS3-80, and DirecTV HD-DVR.

I think a well integrated sub is important for both music and HT. For one thing, it relieves the amps and speakers from LF duty, and it can be difficult to set up speakers for both imaging and LF response.

db
If you are sitting in the middle between your speakers, and the speakers aren't total garbage, then there is no reason to add in a center channel.

What is it doing for you? Dialog will already be anchored dead center for you.

If you have a bunch of off access viewers, then yes, a center channel would be good to anchor the dialog.

This is more a question for you. Do you care about surround? If so, go 4.0 and add in the surrounds. If not, go 2.0. If you sit off access, add in the center. If you like bass and want impact, add in a sub
I listen to 5.0 for most movies. Rarely do I turn the sub on as it is generally not required or forgit to turn on.
I'm planning on doing a form of 4.0. I have the front left & right set up as full range with a sub on each of these 2 channels to enhance the bottom octave. I'm waiting on the surround speakers to arrive. The rear surrounds will be crossed over at 80 or 100Hz into the mains.

Anyone ever try something similar?