Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

@thespeakerdude , There is no accounting for taste. There is no explanation for it, never will be. Some people prefer to listen to systems that are too bright or have too much bass. A sales technique we use to use was to figure out what the person like to listen to then EQ the equipment we wanted to sell to their preference. I got myself out of the Mid Fi world because of the skullduggery. Having dealt with digital signal processing for 25 years or so it is absolutely possible to tailor a system's amplitude response to make it sound like anything from a tonality perspective. The thing is you can not make a bad system image no matter what digital capability you have. It is the most difficult aspect to get right. You can make a good system image better with digital processing.  My experience with multiple speaker set ups is that they only make things worse. My experience in that regard is extremely limited. It seems throughout modern history the industry has tried over and over to shove multiple speakers and amplifiers down our throats always promising a revolution in sound. The results seem to be that all the serious listener's I know still prefer 2 channel systems. There may be more magic you can perform on the recording side. My knowledge of that part is basic at best. 

@mijostyn I very much feel the future is multiple speakers. However when I spend hours listening to surround sound mixes then go back to the 2 channel original it is always the same the 2 channel is better. I don't know why but it is clear 2 channel music is best now. I would say Atmos is best for movies, I don't understand the reason why music now is best in 2 channel and movies are best in multi channel. 

Also dumb question I don't understand using line array speakers in small rooms, I do understand the advantages in efficiency of line arrays but why embrace a phase problem by definition in a small room. I'm sure your speakers sound wonderful I just don't know why someone who is such a careful listener would pick line arrays, this is not a critical note I simply don't know it is my own experience that brings the question I've never seen line arrays in a studio only large room concerts. Thanks

@donavabdear , I never used Room Perfect so maybe DSP is good enough. 

On the other hand, after making the investment in equipment might as well take the time to experiment a little to get it just the way you want. 

Happy New Year!

If anyone wants to try upmixing their 2 channel music here are some things to try:

1) For straight upmixing most people agree Auro-3D works great for music.

2) For upmixing 2 channel or 5.1 channel mixes into Atmos or DTS-X an X-Box series S or X has an app you can get that will render ANY content (music or movies) into an Atmos or DTS-X bitstream for your processor. This works better than the upmixers in your processor 99% of the time.

3) If using the Dolby Surround upmixer in your receiver go into settings and turn center spread to ON.

4) If you already have a 5.1 channel system and want to add speakers add wide or height channels before adding surround back.

My personal preference is to add wide channels first but not all receivers offer wide connections.

I have threads here on setting up your system for Atmos and another on Atmos music for more info.

@donavabdear , Movies are an entirely different proposition and usually a very different audience. Things move around in movies and people love hearing that motion in sound. Imagine Thelonious Monk loading his piano onto an F1 car and driving it around the room. 

There is one application for multiple speakers I may delve into. The door to my workshop faces the back of my media room. I had both the system in the shop going along with the main system and was playing some live record, don't remember which one and darn if it didn't create the third dimension. At the listening position the shop system would have been at least 15 dB down from the main one. The audience noise came from all around like a real show and I felt (sounded) as if I were in a much larger room. The shop speakers are about 30 feet from the listening position, the main speakers 12 feet, an 18 foot difference with a delay of about 1.8 msec. If I mounted something like Kef 50's in the back of the room, ran them 15-20 dB down and delayed them 1.8 msec I should get the same effect. I could increase the delay to simulate a larger venue or turn them off entirely for small ones. Will this detract or add to the 2 channel experience? From what I've heard I think It will definitely add to live albums, maybe not studio ones. The only way I'll ever know for sure is to cough up the money and try it. I'll have an extra 2 channels to play with from the DEQX so all I need is a small amp and the speakers. Ambience speakers only made possible with digital processing. 

You can put a line array in a phone booth if you are so inclined. The benefit in a system like mine comes from several traits that tall ESLs have. To have a full range line source in any room the array has to extend from floor to ceiling or it will revert to point source behavior at low frequencies, frequencies with wavelengths longer than the speakers are tall. 100 Hz is ten feet. The problem is that the sound from point source systems decays at the cube of the distance but line sources decay at the square. Line sources project more powerfully. When you walk towards a line source it does not seem to get much louder. Another interesting trait of line sources is they do not radiate above or below the line. Very little energy is sent towards the ceiling and floor. ESLs are dipoles, they radiate very little energy to the sides. Because of all this Line source dipoles cause much less room interaction and the only room treatment I use is behind the speakers. On either side of the screen is floor to ceiling acoustic tile. All of it cost me $89.00. 

Line arrays sound more powerful. It is like adding a turbocharger to your car. They cast a larger more lifelike image. It is like moving from the back of the hall to the front. Between 100 Hz and 18 kHz ESL have at least one magnitude less distortion. Big ESLs will make bass but it really screws up everything else. 100 Hz and down is way better off coming from a sub. The end result is a large powerful image with lightening fast transient response and a level of detail not possible with most other drivers. They never seem stressed. There is never any sibilance. Violins and female voices are totally painless. Because both channels are equalized to have the exact same frequency response curve imaging is excellent. 

I could go on and on. ESLs are not a panacea. Over 40 years I migrated from Acoustat X's, an extremely flawed loudspeaker, through 4 other pairs of ESLs to the system I have now. From the old X's I heard something at low volumes I never heard out of any other system which attracted me to the type. I knew they could be better, much better. It was a matter of getting that sound up to realistic levels. Smaller ESLs, by smaller I mean less than ceiling height can be wonderful as long as they are not played to loudly, the bass is sent to subwoofers and you realize they are only going to sound right at one distance. They have the problem of changing from point source to line source mid stream which creates variations in frequency response with distance. I find this annoying as they loose that dynamic punch as you move away from them. It is a problem all Magneplaner speakers have. They were going to make the 20.7 8 feet tall but the marketing arm shot that down. ESLs are also difficult to match with amplifiers. Most amps will drive them and most amps will not drive the very well. In my experience it take big amps with huge power supplies that can deal with 1 ohm loads and very high current demands at 16 kHz. They have to have enough power to still be able to put out at 20 ohms in the midbass and they have to be able to handle the reactive nature of the load. These requirements make ESLs a more expensive proposition not to mention subwoofer, more amps and a crossover.