[JoshK]

I was browsing another forum and came across a mention of JBL's 8340A speakers (also a smaller 8320).  This is a really cool speaker for surround duty and what is often used in Cinema for surrounds.

Especially cool if you are using hi-eff speakers like Geddes's line.

http://www.fullcompass.com/product/266276.html

$279/ea is pretty cheap.  I don't think you could DIY something similar for that money or at least not much less.

[ctviggen]

That's per speaker.  I bought four Emotiva surrounds for $500 (no shipping charge) during last year's Christmas sale:

http://emotiva.com/erd1.shtm

Now, they're $350/pair plus shipping.  These are interesting because they can be bipole or dipole. 

I haven't hooked these up, yet.  They also aren't nearly as efficient as the JBLs.  I'll post feedback one day.

[JoshK]

Re: Emotiva, they aren't constant directivity, the JBL's are.  The JBLs will have WAY more headroom and likely an order of magnitude lower distortion on peaks. 

Yeah, that is per speaker.  Still cheap in my mind for what you are getting.  Price out what it would cost to do a similar DIY project.

[Noseyears]

I love the look and feel of these surround speakers, from what i know they have a stunning sound and can beat even full size speakers...have been the choice of many theaters.

[JoshK]

I've been brainstorming such surrounds since I first saw Salk's on wall HT1s form factor and thought to do something like that with the Geddes style approach to speakers.  Then I saw the price and know I'd have a hard time beating that and have to spend a lot of time measuring to build a xo that would work well.

For me, HT needs to get loud and needs to have major dynamic headroom without compression or distortion.  So, this means efficiency rules. 

[boead]

Have you looked at Klipsch?

http://www.klipsch.com/na-en/products/surround-speaker/

[BobM]

For me, HT needs to get loud and needs to have major dynamic headroom without compression or distortion.  So, this means efficiency rules.

You must be listening without the wife in the room. Me, I continually hear "turn it down" when things start exploding and "turn it up" when the softer dialogue comes back into the picture. As un-audiophle as it sounds, I could use a compressor on my HT rig to balance this all out.

[JoshK]

You must be listening without the wife in the room. Me, I continually hear "turn it down" when things start exploding and "turn it up" when the softer dialogue comes back into the picture. As un-audiophle as it sounds, I could use a compressor on my HT rig to balance this all out.

I both agree and disagree.  I think this is actually a complicated subject.  I agree that I find myself constantly turning the volume up or down (or wanting to).  However, lack of compression and distortion on peaks goes a very long way to mitigate perceived loudness in my experience.  This is just one of those phenomenas you have to learn for yourself but it is absolutely universal IME. 

[JoshK]

Have you looked at Klipsch?

http://www.klipsch.com/na-en/products/surround-speaker/

Personally, I do not believe the quoted specs from Klipsch, especially in regards to sensitivity.  Most all of their speakers can be shown to be quite a bit less sensitive than advertised.  Most of those speakers use typical inefficient cones for the woofers.

[eclein]

http://www.energy-speakers.com/na-en/products/bookshelf/

I have CC-5 center and they blend excellently with my JBL's

[ctviggen]

For me, HT needs to get loud and needs to have major dynamic headroom without compression or distortion.  So, this means efficiency rules.

I don't believe efficiency has much to do with it.  I've used my Mirages and Linn 5140s for surround duties, neither of which is that efficient, and have never heard compression or distortion.  And I've played things so loud I couldn't stand it.  Think the Matrix shoot out scene or the opening scene to Lord of the Rings.

I agree that it's going to be hard to build a speaker cheaper than the one you've recommended (or the one I "recommended"; can't really recommend them, as they've never been out of the box). 

[JoshK]

I don't believe efficiency has much to do with it. 

Then we'll agree to disagree.  I do concede though that surrounds get a far less intensive workout then the mains and center.

[S Clark]

Personally, I do not believe the quoted specs from Klipsch, especially in regards to sensitivity.  Most all of their speakers can be shown to be quite a bit less sensitive than advertised.  Most of those speakers use typical inefficient cones for the woofers.
[/quote


I wouldn't get too excited about those JBL specs either.  I noticed that the had the frequency range stated at -10dB.  Most serious speakers list F3.

[boead]

Personally, I do not believe the quoted specs from Klipsch, especially in regards to sensitivity.  Most all of their speakers can be shown to be quite a bit less sensitive than advertised.  Most of those speakers use typical inefficient cones for the woofers.

I had a pair of RB5-2's (http://www.klipsch.com/na-en/products/rb-5-specifications/) that drove nicely with a 1 wpc SET. Rated at 96db.