dynaudio or M & k for home theater

Dynaudio doesn't have good centers, and no rears in the contour series, which is where you want to be at. I also don't think they sound like Wilsons, but ymmv. ps. I owned 1.3SEs, a phenomenal speaker.

I have two systems--M&K S150s for HT, and to be determined for the other (Wilson Sophias top right now). M&Ks have awesome dynamics, and it is spooky how good they sound in HT. A little flat for music, but that is the way they are designed.

Wilson is great, but 25-30k for HT (Sophias, Watch) vs 3k M&Ks is a different entire league...match the M&Ks with a quality sub and be done. I am.

Actually, the 1.3 makes a WONDERFUL center channel as well as a nice surround. They just don't make bipole/dipoles.

To each their own.

I agree strongly with Keithr. My dedicated theater began with Definitive BP2002TL as mains, CLR2500 center, BP2x sides and 6.5” 2-way in-wall rears. Threw a big soundstage but something was still lacking.

I then converted over to M&K S-150 for mains and center, SS-150 tripole for sides, kept the Definitive in-walls for the rear and use a Boston Acoustics PV1000 sub. This change yielded a dramatic improvement across the audio spectrum. It really is scary how well the M&Ks image and seem to disappear in front of you. They are very accurate and dynamic which I think works very well in HT. Regarding their use for music...they’re OK...a little ‘cool’ for my taste. I chose the PV1000 over the M&K MX200 because I felt it was faster and tighter than the M&K. Overall output was lower with the PV1000, but I wanted something cleaner rather than high output. I figure I can always add another PV1000 if I need it...so far not even a consideration!

I recently considered combining my 2-channel system with my HT system. I moved my Boston Acoustics Lynnfield 500L speakers from my living room to the HT (along with the Aragon 8008ST amp to drive them). Now, mind you, these are $5000 floor-standing speakers v. the $1700 M&K satellites. It was no contest…..the M&Ks just sounded better. They presented a bigger soundstage, were more dynamic and drew you into the action to a greater degree. Another big plus is their small size. Even in my dedicated room, placed next to a 92” diagonal screen, its nice to not see a huge tower right next to the picture.

If HT is the primary consideration, I think its very hard to beat the M&Ks, especially when cost is factored in. If you want to also use them for 2-channel listening, you might want to look at some other brands that straddle the HT/2-channel line a little better. Hope this helps.

The reason wilson sounds like dynaudio is b/c wilson uses dynaudio drivers. I use the 1.8's and contour center up front and the integration is seemless. I don't know what keithr is talking about, the quality and craftsmanship of the center channel is consistent with the rest of the series. They just upgraded the contour line and the new series also has a center channel. If you are looking for wilson sound at a reasonable cost I think you already know what you need to get.

Thanks for the great info., I still have not purchased componets, the carpet seems to be taking longer than I thought. Any more info on comparisons between people that heard M & K, wilson, dynaudio first hand would be great. After reading these posts I think I may also have to make a drive to compare dynaudio to M & K.