+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Centre Speakers Suck

  1. #11
    Join Date: Oct 2011

    Location: Bacup

    Posts: 502
    I'm Andrew.

    Default

    Yes, Macca said the same, but I want to know why. What are the technological issues?

  2. #12
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: N E Kent

    Posts: 51,624
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    Centre speakers are usually designed with rather restricted bandwidth. The cabinet volumes are smaller and main drivers can be smaller. Compare specs with main left/right speakers and you'll see what I mean.
    It is impossible for anything digital to sound analogue, because it isn't analogue!

  3. #13
    Join Date: Oct 2011

    Location: Bacup

    Posts: 502
    I'm Andrew.

    Default

    The ATC centre example I used actually went lower in the bass. Admittedly it only went to 20khz as opposed to the 22khz at the upper end compared to their similar dedicated stereo set. But considering you get six drivers as opposed to four, I still do not really understand the price difference. It would be nice if someone could experiment, but as you pointed out, who has two centre speakers?

  4. #14
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,772
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Most speakers you see with 2 bass drivers have one handling the full range and the other just handling bass from around 400Hz and down i.e 2 and a half way. So the lower driver is just a passive subwoofer. But if you run both drivers with the same signal as with a centre speaker you will get some phase and cancellation issues. Someone more technical than I am can no doubt explain in detail. In any case you can do this with stereo speakers and some companies have, I recall Harman Kardon did a floorstander configured that way back in the 'Nineties. The advantages I can see would be efficiency, power handling and a simpler crossover. With the ATC speakers mentioned I am guessing the centre does not use the same drivers as the stereo speakers so that is why it is cheaper. One thing for certain using two of their centres as stereo speakers would not be the same as using their dedicated stereo speakers.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  5. #15
    Join Date: Oct 2011

    Location: Bacup

    Posts: 502
    I'm Andrew.

    Default

    Loads of speaker manufacturers/designs use multiples of the same driver. I do take the point that the drivers compared to their main stereo 'equivalents' may well be very different.

  6. #16
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,772
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    They may use the same driver or what looks like the same driver (one of them could be modified but not visibly) but they are rarely fed the same signal by the crossover.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  7. #17
    Join Date: Oct 2011

    Location: Bacup

    Posts: 502
    I'm Andrew.

    Default

    My mis-understanding then. I thought it was possible to achieve the equivalent of larger cone sizes by using multiples of smaller ones. I assumed each driver received the same signal.

  8. #18
    Join Date: Oct 2014

    Location: Glasgow, Scotland, UK

    Posts: 53
    I'm Derek.

    Default

    I've just returned to a surround setup and have decided on a 4.0 system to ensure good sonic cohesion across the front channels. Fwiw, I've got neighbours on three sides of my listening room, so don't want or need a sub.

    I use it mostly with m/c DVD-A, SACD and Blu-ray audio discs (I'm not too fussed about films) and yet lots of people keep saying I absolutely need a centre speaker, well no thanks, my system rocks
    Analogue
    Technics 1210GR (AT-VM95ML)>Rega Aria mk2>Teddy Pardo i80a>Tannoy Eaton Legacy

    Digital Stereo
    Bluesound Node 2i>Chord Qutest>Teddy Pardo i80a>Tannoy Eaton Legacy

    Digital Surround
    (f): OPPO 103D>Marantz NR1510>Teddy Pardo i80a>Tannoy Eaton Legacy
    (r): OPPO 103D>Marantz NR1510>Kralk Audio BC-30
    (c): no centre
    (s): no sub

    Other
    Headphones :Sennheiser HD650
    Equipment Stands: Mana Acoustics

  9. #19
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,772
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RMutt View Post
    My mis-understanding then. I thought it was possible to achieve the equivalent of larger cone sizes by using multiples of smaller ones. I assumed each driver received the same signal.
    They do if there are multiple bass drivers - so if a speaker has 3 identical drivers and a tweeter, the driver immediately below the tweeter will be run from say 3 kHz all the way down to the bottom of its range and the two drivers below that will handle 400Hz and down, fed the same signal in parallel, and as you say, attempting to mimic a larger bass driver. Pretty much all mass-market WAF towers use that formula.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  10. #20
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: N E Kent

    Posts: 51,624
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RMutt View Post
    My mis-understanding then. I thought it was possible to achieve the equivalent of larger cone sizes by using multiples of smaller ones. I assumed each driver received the same signal.
    Multiples of smaller drivers can offer cone areas to match larger drivers. but the smaller drivers will still have their higher natural resonance and have different tonal characteristics. What part of the signal is used for each driver in a passive design will depend on the crossover.
    It is impossible for anything digital to sound analogue, because it isn't analogue!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •