Over the holidays I got to hear a family members new investment of a surround sound system. Not the top of the line Definitive Technology setup but pretty damn close. I think he spent at least 3 grand for this setup. It sounded spectacular. I don't have that kind of cash to drop. I have an run of the mill LG sound bar with a wireless sub. I pulled out my 20 year old 60 watt Onkyo receiver and my 35 year old Polk 5 Junior bookshelf speakers and set them up. No center speaker. No surround speakers. No sub. Damn if I can't tell much difference between the two and I really thought that my old setup would smoke the soundbar, but it didn't. So, is investing in today's technology (new receiver, tower front left and right, center, sub, and rear speakers) going to yield better sound over the entry level sound bar to 58 year old ears that have significant high frequency hearing loss? And, maybe a little bit more. How is speaker technology different today over 30 years ago?

For me, yes it was worth it.

I bought a 4K HDR 75 inch Sony TV and got the matching pretty nice sound bar with wireless sub. It was OK. But it just didn't do the TV justice and I wanted more then just OK. This was a retirement gift to myself.

I got full credit for the sound bar back in on a surround system. 19 total speakers in 6 boxes set up as 5.1. Sony receiver and Klipshc speakers.

I'm happy now.

EDIT to add: Well pretty happy.
Warning... Slippery slope ahead.
My receiver will do 7.1 or 9.1. And it will do two zones with the same or different inputs simultaneously.
I could watch TV in the Den and pipe sound out to the Patio from a second source such as the radio or iTunes library.

Jib jabed yourself?

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/2430032154

If you can't tell the difference then your old stereo is junk.

From what I have read lately, speakers have improved. Designers found that sealing the enclosure, wave-tuning the box and new materials for speaker cones and magnets made huge improvements. Speaker designers like Andrew Jones moved the bar even further; wave technology and such. Like small motorcycles and smart phones, smaller speakers can outperform their larger predecessors for less cost.

quote:

If you can't tell the difference then your old stereo is junk.

Or your Ears are junk - More likely

Center speaker is a important component in surround.

I can listen to My Phone ripped crap and it sounds good -

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Jib jabed yourself?

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/2430032154

You may be right. Sorry about that folks. I thought it was a separate question.

I always thought when it came to speakers the crossover was the only place where difference can really occur. The cabinets are made out of the same stuff and in the same relative shape. The speakers are made from the same material. Tweeters are made from different material then back in the day so there is some change there. My old receiver does have surround, but it predates 5.1.

Maybe the difference is in the amp section. So, any major changes in amplification in the last 35 years?

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
Over the holidays I got to hear a family members new investment of a surround sound system. Not the top of the line Definitive Technology setup but pretty damn close. I think he spent at least 3 grand for this setup. It sounded spectacular. I don't have that kind of cash to drop. I have an run of the mill LG sound bar with a wireless sub. I pulled out my 20 year old 60 watt Onkyo receiver and my 35 year old Polk 5 Junior bookshelf speakers and set them up. No center speaker. No surround speakers. No sub. Damn if I can't tell much difference between the two and I really thought that my old setup would smoke the soundbar, but it didn't. So, is investing in today's technology (new receiver, tower front left and right, center, sub, and rear speakers) going to yield better sound over the entry level sound bar to 58 year old ears that have significant high frequency hearing loss? And, maybe a little bit more. How is speaker technology different today over 30 years ago?

Not much time to respond now but a few quick points...

1: like most things in life, not all is created equal. A good soundbar will sound better than a poor set of “traditional speakers”. The opposite is true as well. The nature of sound hasn’t changed at all, right? Good sounds is good sound.

2: while there has been technological advances in speaker building, it won’t come into play much for 95% of consumers. You’ve got to dabble in some very high end circles or extreme output scenarios for that to really be a concern. Trust me, that’s not you.

3: check alternative sources for cheaper but excellent sounding speakers.... for instance, www.partsexpeess.com.

4: watch www.slickdeaks.com for receivers after you figure out what features you want. $200 is all you probably need but you can scale up from there. I’m partial to Yamaha or Denon. Yamaha is more user friendly. A basic Yamaha with an auto tuning feature that uses a microphone (included) is a great way to go.

5: finally, for now. If you want nice full, rich sound, you need “large” speakers. A 2” cone will not produce low end well enough unless you. Get into crazy line arrays with a lot of transducers. Again, that’s not you. This tip is chock full of subjectivity, but that’s the way it is. Your main left and right speakers and the sub truly need some size to them for a full sound. All speakers, including surround, should be 2 way, at minimum (tweeter and woofer). 3 way for any front speaker is even better. You could easily assemble a great sounding system to must people’s ears for under $1500.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Jib jabed yourself?

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/2430032154

You may be right. Sorry about that folks. I thought it was a separate question.

I always thought when it came to speakers the crossover was the only place where difference can really occur. The cabinets are made out of the same stuff and in the same relative shape. The speakers are made from the same material. Tweeters are made from different material then back in the day so there is some change there. My old receiver does have surround, but it predates 5.2.

Maybe the difference is in the amp section. So, any major changes in amplification in the last 35 years?

Not really true... and frankly, it’s about a proper design. There is huge variation in cabinet design and materials, and it matters greatly. Speakers themselves can be made from about a million different materials, but here is a secret.... 100hz is 100hz no matter if it’s a paper, poly, or Kevlar, or metal, or whatever you want cone.

For large, bass producing speakers you need sturdy and rigid boxes of proper size, and, likely properly vented or otherwise tuned (Like a passive radiator).

But all this matters much much more to one who is a real stickler with lots of listening experience. I don’t get that from you, frankly.

Good quality receiver, speakers from a trusted maker, which is likely NOT a big household name. Good news? There are about a million good choices. Speaker building is a science, but it is a well understood and easy to reproduce science.

The advance in speaker technology is the difference between "active" and "passive" speakers.

I have a pair of Bang & Olufsen BeoLab 6000 speakers (mated to a BeoSound Ouverture main) and they are the best sounding speakers I've ever heard. You'd not think so by looking at them. The key is they are "active" speakers, which means they have their own amplifiers built-in. This means they don't need to be as big as passive speakers, which are driven by an external amplifier.



They aren't cheap, but they are worth every penny to me!

When your listen enough your ears get educated and you will be able to tell the difference and appreciate the better sound quality.
It is the reason I am re-doing my car sound system now.
Home systems are much more challenging as there are costs, acoustics to deal with, 2-channel vs surround sound.
Great enjoyment though.

If you could hear a big difference between your friend's system and either of yours, then either your ears are NOT junk, or your mind fooled you into thinking your friend's system sounded better.

It really is worthwhile to do some auditioning of different systems to see what you can and can't hear, and what sounds good to you.

The very best way available to most of us is to find a good audio store and audition different pairs of speakers, and if possible different amps/receivers.

Barring that, reading lots of reviews can help, but understand they are written by people who do this a lot, and who are convinced they know what really sounds good.

In the old days of "hi-fi" there were shows regionally, usually in hotels, where manufacturers had their systems set up to listen to.

That's where I was blown away by the sound of Quad electrostatic speakers ( the original ones). I doubt I could still hear that special difference.

As far as active vs. passive speakers, there are potential advantages to the manufacturer that allow tuning of active speakers to optimize their sound; but a good amp with passive speakers can be as good or better. Myself I now use active speakers (Audioengine HD-6's) for their convenience (Bluetooth+digital+audio inputs).

Confession: I've never really tried surround sound, as I don't have a dedicated home theater room.

quote:

Originally posted by fpuhan:
The advance in speaker technology is the difference between "active" and "passive" speakers.

I have a pair of Bang & Olufsen BeoLab 6000 speakers (mated to a BeoSound Ouverture main) and they are the best sounding speakers I've ever heard. You'd not think so by looking at them. The key is they are "active" speakers, which means they have their own amplifiers built-in. This means they don't need to be as big as passive speakers, which are driven by an external amplifier.



They aren't cheap, but they are worth every penny to me!

They let isbt being “active” at all. The key is it is a well designed transducer system combined with a well designed and built enclosure combined with a well designed crossover system combined with a well designed and applied amplifier... where thatvamplifier is physically located has little to do with the end quality.

As the good doc suggests, spending time doing some listening of different brands is very valuable as different brands tend to have different “sound profiles”. For instance, Dynaudio is my preferred brand and they tend to sound very neutral... not imparting “coloration” on their own. Others prefer brands that extenuate the bass or the treble or whatever. But again, this isn’t magic. It is a function of the frequencies generated and their relative level to other frequencies... and almost entirely changeable with a good EQ.

Further, I continue to hold that the vast manority of consumer will be happy with the vast majority of even mediocre quality speakers, especially under blind testing.

Aside from FRFR speakers, most people forget about just how bad their room is for audio repro.

I firmly believe that most people would be very happy with this system, especially if combined with a good quality receiver that has the ability to automatically do in room setup using a microphone. Many can do that.

https://www.parts-express.com/...2-subwoofer--300-699

This system would easily compare favorably to big name brand systems costing 3-4 times its price. Simply put, you have quality components in thoughtfully designed applications. I’m not sure if their return policy but if it were rather generous, I think it’s worth a try. And I think you’ll be surprised.

Uhmm, where’s Rainman?...his system is phenomenal

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
Over the holidays I got to hear a family members new investment of a surround sound system. Not the top of the line Definitive Technology setup but pretty damn close. I think he spent at least 3 grand for this setup. It sounded spectacular. I don't have that kind of cash to drop. I have an run of the mill LG sound bar with a wireless sub. I pulled out my 20 year old 60 watt Onkyo receiver and my 35 year old Polk 5 Junior bookshelf speakers and set them up. No center speaker. No surround speakers. No sub. Damn if I can't tell much difference between the two and I really thought that my old setup would smoke the soundbar, but it didn't. So, is investing in today's technology (new receiver, tower front left and right, center, sub, and rear speakers) going to yield better sound over the entry level sound bar to 58 year old ears that have significant high frequency hearing loss? And, maybe a little bit more. How is speaker technology different today over 30 years ago?

Not the best comparison, but - didn't you answer your own question already? You heard a new setup and it was "spectacular"! You need to get to some stores and demo a few different speakers. From my experience - avoid the small speakers unless you're like me and have to have them on the wall (mine's in a small area, gotta maximize the floor space). Here's a very involved home theater forum: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/index.php takes a bit of digging but there's a lot of good advice on there.

The second night of listening has been different. I have forgotten just what to listen for. My old speakers have more depth and imagining. I set up a second pair on rear surround to add additional depth. I suspect if I moved the front left and right a little farther apart it would improve the quality. Its been 20 years since these speakers have had a signal put through them. I wonder if they needed some time to limber up again. The speakers I'm using as the main front I bought in 1984. And, the rear surrounds I bought in 1996. Both bookshelf models.

If you are wanting to upgrade to a surround system, suggest to use your existing speakers for front/rear. Put your money in the largest/full range center channel speaker within your budget and space limitations and add a subwoofer. If your room layout allows, consider a infinite baffle (IB) subwoofer. Very simple to build.

I've listened to this sub several years ago, amazing! Inspired me to build a 4-15" infinite baffle subwoofer.

https://web.archive.org/web/20...page13-12Shiva1.html

Offgrid that was amazing. But, I fear if I start cutting holes in the floor for a sub my wife is going to have something to say about that. I watched part of a movie last night. I'm already hearing dialog better. I've already decided to add a Definitive Technology center and sub. Their smaller models are affordable.