It is not you, the sound really is getting worse

I understand where Toole is going with this, and in absolute arguments, comparing them to ideal, he’s right, they are not optimum. In practice I’ve been quite successful. Maybe I accidentally created the best center channel ever??? << laughs >> Sorry, you all know I don’t believe that. Let me share the design I used. It sounds great. It blends seamlessly with my sides, which are simple 2-ways. With a little EQ, and decent room treatment the sound is seamless and there is no extra distortion caused by using an MTM array and it is perfectly fine to the sides as well.

https://speakermakersjourney.blogspot.com/2016/03/introducing-lm-1c.html
As I’ve alluded to, but not really said, for a counter point to Toole’s arguments, please see Joseph D’Appolito on his eponymous speaker configuration.

P.S. The LM-1C uses 2nd and 3rd order filters.

Just to be clear, @spenav : You and Toole seem to be discussing two different things.

You keep saying distortion and dialogue clarity. If we’re talking about on-axis, then nothing Tool is describing really should create a lack of dialogue clarity. The only thing I can think of is if you have a bare floor, which is causing cancellation due to the wide dispersion. However I hear NO dialogue distortion at all. Certainly not like you are describing.

Toole is focused on off-axis frequency cancellation, but the floor bounce of the Paradigm CC 208 should be quite similar. On axis, I don’t see how the 3-way inherently resolves distortion, nor can I see how the 2-way would cause it.

I wonder if the problem isn’t just that commercial 2-way center channel speakers are bad? :-) Truth is, I haven’t heard a consumer, off the shelf center channel in 15 years at least. If given the chance to listen to systems it was always for music. About 5 years ago I built my own center and never thought about listening to them in a store.


Best,
E

Sorry for the confusion about my use of the word distortion. I am talking about it in generic terms. You and Toole are using it in a more polished way than I am. I talked about it as whatever changes the original signal. I know you are kidding about creating the perfect center but you just might have. If the dialogue is clear and intelligible then you have accomplished the goal. Problem solved. I went a different way but am very happy with the results. I have always have an aversion to passive crossover. I am ok with active. I am familiar with the D’Appolito design and while it has solved a lot of the problems with TM and MT configurations, it introduces its own difficulties in regards to crossover and drivers distances and sizes. Guess nothing is easy and implementation does count for something 😊.  Glad you pulled it off. Stay safe. 

@erik_squires , I've had the best luck on center channels with concentric drivers (least disruptive!). I have the Elac Adante series by A.Jones for my hometheater and that center channel is awesome (though it is humongous and takes over your space)

However, i am wondering why a lotta guys here are complaining about dialogue issues in soundtracks. Turn up the center channel level ! Some receivers like the Yamaha Aventage series have an abundance of features like dialog level boost, height setting, etc. Dialogue intelligibility should not be an issue with a modern relatively higher end receiver with proper setup imo. Some of the comments i've read on other threads reek of huge knowledge gaps in hometheater speakers/receiver setup

On the bright side, if one likes music with a fusion of orchestral and electronic elements, movies and games have some amazing soundtracks out there. (Movies: Tenet by Ludwig Gorannson, Inception by Hans Zimmer, etc   Games: Mass Effect Andromeda!! by John Paesano, Deus Ex Mankind Divided by Michael McCann , Witcher 2 soundtrack, etc). I sure as hell am not a gamer. But, thank God, my son introduced me to this amazing genre of music.

Yes, turning up the center is a good fix, as is using dynamic range compression available in all modern processors.

Still, the honest truth is that dialogue is worse than it was before. Even in carefully calibrated THX theaters LotR had issues, and it’s gotten worse.

As some one who started in the pro motion picture sound industry this trend is a huge disappointment. It used to be that theaters were THE high end audio experience for most. Speaking of Toole, he’s done a lot of work in them, so a lot of his writing is from that perspective, and maybe why I agree with him on just about everything. :)

We went from motion pictures being the high end, to mediocre boxes, back to the high end with THX and now the directors themselves seem to be trying hard to make it worse.

One kind of underlying theme about motion picture sound is the question of what it is there fore. Dolby Surround (ProLogic for the home) made a clear declaration:  Motion picture sound is here to excite you, and we don't much care what the mixers want.

If you wanted fine sound control you had to use magnetic sound tracks until digital tracks came along. That opened up a whole new set of choices for movie editors.  Now sounds could not just surprise you, but immerse you as well, and in many cases I've really enjoyed this kind of recording.  The Expanse comes to mind here as a great example.

Well, I guess the pendulum is swinging back against delicacy and nuance, and those of us who care about dialogue are going to be left longing for the good old days of mono.