# New 5.1 HT. HiFi vs PA monitors?



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

I've been looking for a decent 5.1 setup a living room of 18'x13' and 7' viewing distance. Budget is up to 5k€, from which I thought to set 2k for the receiver, 1k for the sub and the rest 2k for the speakers.

Looking for a good value, this was in a first my final projected setup:

Fronts: Focal Chorus 826 W (floorstandings)
Rest: central and surround bipolar speakers same line as the fronts.
Sub: Rythmik F15HP Direct Servo (sealed, 600w)
Receiver: Denon AVR-4311 (Audyssey MultEQ XT32)









Then I read about PA monitors, dedicated amping and outstanding accurate sound, and hard to beat value over HiFi. But Im concerned about known cons. Too bright clinical sound, poor off-axis behaviour, ear fatiguing, and less deep on sound vs the HiFi gear. 

I've read good reviews about *Adams A8X*, and wondering how much of those cons for home HT listening would be a deal breaker for a good monitors. Replacing the receiver for a pre/pro, this would be an alternative setup to the Focal HiFi setup,

Fronts & center: 3x *Adam A8X*
Surrounds: 2x *Adam A5X*
Sub: same model as previous setup, Rythmik F15HP.
Processor: onkyo PR-SC5508 (Audyssey MultEQ XT32)


Do you think going the pre/pro + active monitores way may worth it? Living room is 18'x13' at distance 7', for an wide area for 2-3 listeners at max.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Most "PA" active monitors are designed to be used in more live venues with a larger space. Generally thay are also weaker in the mids and brighter in the highs (nothing an EQ cant fix) but I think that you need to try them before you buy just to get a better idea.


----------



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

Is for that Im looking for a AVR or pre/pro with the new Audyssey *MultEQ XT32*, which I read good things about it.

The key is, with all elements, I can configure a setup that performs better for the money than the equivalent on HiFi gear. Its commonly said PA monitors to offer a better value, so no that marketing involved with it as with most HiFi stuff for mass consumption.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
PA Monitors can be problematic in an Near Field Listening Setup as most folks HT's are. Now there are Pro Audio Monitors that could work just fine in an HT.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2011)

Jungle Jack said:


> Hello,
> PA Monitors can be problematic in an Near Field Listening Setup as most folks HT's are. Now there are Pro Audio Monitors that could work just fine in an HT.
> Cheers,
> JJ


Is that because of the wide axis horns?


----------



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

Jungle Jack said:


> Hello,
> PA Monitors can be problematic in an Near Field Listening Setup as most folks HT's are. Now there are Pro Audio Monitors that could work just fine in an HT.
> Cheers,
> JJ


I guess the problem is the off-axis response on most PA speakers, they sounds good just at a narrow sweet-spot.

Not the near-field by itself, since they are indeed designed for near-field listening.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Most PA Monitors are setup around the Stage, raised on high and are many feet away from where the Audience is sitting so I personally do not consider that Near Field. And in events where the PA Monitors are setup near the Audience, the Mix is certainly not designed for those standing near there and is why the Sound Engineer sits 30 Feet away or more sometimes. Those that sit close risk Hearing Loss.

Again, Pro Monitors will be fine and many use them. PA Monitors are Designed for Concerts, etc and and hundreds of pounds.
JJ


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

The Adam A8Xs are not Public Address Speakers, they are Studio Monitors. I think there's been some confusion in this thread.

And even a well-designed custom PA-style speaker, like a JTR Triple 8 or Gedlee Abbey, may in fact be used in home theater with impressive results. One I think that represents an interesting value, which you may want to get in touch with and get an audition for, would be an Audio Kinesis Rythim Prism. As you can see, it visually has the look of a Hi-Fi speaker, but with Public Address concepts. The information written on those pages is not marketing propoganda, it's actually rather true (as always, to an extent only), so you might be well-served to read it. 

Generalizations like "Hi-Fi" "Studio" "Concert" are useful at times because they do have their differences, but at other times just create confusion about sound signature or possibly applications. One of my most coveted drivers in the world is a JBL 4" Beryllium compression driver, which is used in a speaker designed for tiny japanese rooms, the Everest (A speaker I hope to hear some day):










Yet at its heart, that speaker is made with Public Address fundamentals, not "Hi-Fi". It is designed to be the Highest-Fi speaker they (JBL) could engineer.

Same applies to Studio Monitors. Speakers are complex things, they are.


----------



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

GranteedEV said:


> The Adam A8Xs are not Public Address Speakers, they are Studio Monitors. I think there's been some confusion in this thread.


I thought 'PA' standed for 'Pro Active', not Public Address.

By the way, what do you mean A8Xs are not public address, not well suited for HT purposes? Im yet to know about its off-axis response, and sound dispersion capabilities to fill good of sound a 18'x13'x8' living room. 

Do you recommend to stick better with Focal HiFi choice? Like the Focal sound, but cant get an audition witht he Adams. If I go with active sepakers, I can afford a dedicated processor for the task, and will have the dedicated amping of the speakers. If I go HiFi with Focal, I'll have to go with a receiver; dont have budget for pre/pro+amp with the passive HiFi speakers.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

I am a proponent of active crossovers and bi/tri-amped speakers. 

In your scenario I think you really, really need to actively track down any speaker you want to buy for an audition, unfortunately. It has nothing to do with studio monitors and Hi-Fi, it has to do with speakers plain and simple.



> By the way, what do you mean A8Xs are not public address, not well suited for HT purposes?


I think you need to re-read my post. As I said, you can't make any generalization with any type of speaker unless you have actual access to its advanced measurements. Public Address means that the actual design concept of the speaker would have been to get sound to cover a given area, in large spaces and at high SPLs. Studio Monitor normally means something that can be used as a reference for doing tracking or mixing. Hi-Fi as "we know it" applies to speakers intended for living rooms, but in reality can be anything from a Cerwin Vega with erratic response to an Aurum Cantus. Really, Some of the most hi-fi (High Fidelity) speakers do include professional application speakers from the likes of Genelec or Meyer. The biggest tradeoffs I've found between a professional designed speaker and a home designed speaker is probably output vs extension. PA (Public Address) speakers often only have bass down to 120hz or so, and then require a subwoofer which extends down to 45hz or so with high SPLs. Maximum Fidelity may be compromised, but not NECESSARILY. Home speakers often have bass down to 70hz or so, and subs that can do deeper than 20hz. The tradeoff is raw output ability/sensitivity. Studio Monitors (Near-Field Monitors) are really similar to Home speakers, with some design differences. Many of the guys here at HTS use Behringer 2030P studio monitors in their home theaters. 



> Im yet to know about its off-axis response, and sound dispersion capabilities to fill good of sound a 18'x13'x8' living room.


Ribbons are unique, to say the least. They can be very dynamic, and that is not the largest room in the world. The toughest thing with ribbons used as in the Adam A8X is probably the crossover to a cone midrange, as the polar patterns in the vertical plane rarely match up. Vertical dispersion is normally (but not necessarily as with anything) minimal while horizontal dispersion can be extremely wide and consistent. 

In that sense, many of us used to dome tweeters never really get "comfortable" with ribbons crossed to cones... I think if I ever messed with a ribbon tweeter, the midrange would need to be an infinity MRS or such as well. On the other hand, many others, such as Jim Salk, are enamoured with the unique sound of ribbon tweeters and their ability to be extremely clean, dynamic, yet non-fatigueing. If you've ever heard a good ribbon tweeter/cone midrange speaker, then you'll have a much better idea of whether you like it. Since ribbons (read: not "studio monitors"... ribbons. There are many hi-fi speakers that use ribbons) are unique I have to say that you really need to hear one yourself to make any sort of judgement... you may find you prefer that sound greatly. Unfortunately in your scenario it appears that isn't an option.


> Do you recommend to stick better with Focal HiFi choice? Like the Focal sound, but cant get an audition witht he Adams. If I go with active sepakers, I can afford a dedicated processor for the task, and will have the dedicated amping of the speakers. If I go HiFi with Focal, I'll have to go with a receiver; dont have budget for pre/pro+amp with the passive HiFi speakers.


I'm actually a big proponent of active speakers, and I also feel professional speakers are can be a superior value as they trade aesthetics and "Hi-Fi marketing" for pure functionality. I'd like to point out that the Focal speaker you're looking at looks absolutely superb. On that note though, Focal Profession makes active studio monitors. Since you are familiar with their drivers, you may be well-suited to track down some Focal Pro monitors. The A8X is about $1800/pr so on that note Focal's CMS 65 may be an option you should look into. 

My preference for studio monitors would be the LSR offerings by JBL. Their usage of excellent drivers, well-built enclosures, and optimized polar response means that they are well-suited a wide sweet spot, sharp imaging, neutral presentation, and high output. Look into some LSR 6328s :T

A few other brands of Active speakers you should consider are Seaton Sparks, ATC, PMC, Phase Tech DARTS, and anything with a DEQX.

With all that said, I fail to see why a receiver should cost you more than a pre/pro. I'm under the impression that you may be about to pay for an overpriced pre-pro, in the process under-paying for speakers. Electronic costlier than a Marantz SR5005 starts to get into the "law of diminishing returns". The cheapest Pre-pros are above that cost range, so you may want to re-evaluate your budget. Now returning to the passive speakers you were looking at, the 826Ws IIRC, you might need a robust amplifier anyways, as it does start to ask for a more expensive amp. I do know that earlier generations of Marantz receivers (such as the SR6004) are comfortable with these types of loads, but I can't say with sureness if the current SR5005 would drive that speaker well. If you're okay with no 3D, the SR6004 is an excellent choice of electronic for receiver, and may be able to open up your budget for superior speakers.

I still always recommend active speakers as I think their pros do outweigh their cons. But a good receiver is often a better choice on a budget than a great pre-pro for the best end-result. Speakers/Room are usually 99% of what you hear, and active speakers also take amplifier issues out of the equation. 

A pre-pro on the other hand does some useful things, but I see electronics as a cherry-on top, so you really should not be looking at active speakers with the idea of "saving money by getting a pre-pro over a high end receiver" - because a pre-pro is actually more expensive than a good receiver. And great receivers like the SR6004 i mentioned earlier, often have excellent pre-out headroom, which further reduces the advantages of dedicated processors.

The advantages of active speakers are in other places which usually involve taking passive crossovers out of the equation. Not the advantages of just having a speaker that powers itself so you don't need a great amplifier on the receiver.

I also recommend going light on surround speakers when on a budget. Even something cheap like the Behringer 2030Ps driven off a receiver amp will work very well for surround in movies. Not quite so if you listen to multichannel music but my point is, the front three speakers define a system. it's not worth it to reduce your budget on fronts to accomodate surrounds.


----------



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

GranteedEV thanks for your valuable input, it really helps me to see both things more open minded and understand better the concepts to find what fits better to my needs (although more information leads sometimes to more doubts and makes decisions a bit of more complex task to take).

I had already read and interested on JBLs LSR6328P, but discarded them finally bc they triple the price of A8X, at least here over europe. Another consideration are KRKs VT8 which I read they tend to sound more 'HiFi' of the rest of the monitors, most of them more clinical/surgical/bright. Im specially concerned about ear fatiguing, since the setup ir oriented to listening pleasure, and everyone seems to be on the side thats incompatible with studio or active biamped monitors.

As for investing on electronics wagon, I agree with you but one thing, DACs. I find it to have a important role on resulting performance. At the 'analog era', this role was on the players, reading analog sources. Now the players just 'bitstream' digital content, and its key role by then, is now on the ditital-to-analog converters. So having a dedicated piece which takes care with this step, involves good electronic components on DACs.

Other aspects why I thought on onkyo processor is becouse the highly acclaimed Aydyssey MultEQ XT32, which takes care at some extent on the acoustic flaws of the room, and the XLR outs.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

Skeletor said:


> As for investing on electronics wagon, I agree with you but one thing, DACs. I find it to have a important role on resulting performance. At the 'analog era', this role was on the players, reading analog sources. Now the players just 'bitstream' digital content, and its key role by then, is now on the ditital-to-analog converters. So having a dedicated piece which takes care with this step, involves good electronic components on DACs..


99% of Modern DACs by burr-brown, wolfson, cirrus logic, analog devices are essentially the same. Any differences between them are likely going to be in measurement only, not audibiity. I agree with you that a good DAC is necessary, but most of these electronics already use good dacs. You do still want multiple DACs for a surround processor though, in order to keep processing resolution high.

DSP on the other hand, is different. DSP is inherently designed to alter signals as specified, so of course a Yamaha or Pioneer DSP would differ from a Marantz or Denon DSP.

As far as KRKs, I've only hear the cheaper ones (rokit) but they weren't as strikingly neutral and clean as other speakers at the price point. There's home bookshelfs, towers, and studio monitors I would prefer personally. VT8s I have not heard. When you say "most of them more clinical/surgical/bright" I don't know why you think this is a bad thing. For starters, take bright out of there, as a good monitor should never be bright or warm as that would result in poor mixes. Then you get to "clinical" and what's really wrong with that? It just means a speaker doesn't actively color the sound. It's a desirable trait to have, whether that's a monitor or a living room tower. It's a positive. Someone telling you otherwise would likely be the sort to tell you that vinyl is superior to compact disc because the latter sounds "digital" 

Re: Audessey XT32 is something I would like to have, but dual discrete subEQ is far more valuable.

Re: JBL. Where in Europe are you located? Also, 4328s aren't half bad themselves. Very good monitors.


----------



## Skeletor (Mar 9, 2011)

GranteedEV said:


> Re: JBL. Where in Europe are you located? Also, 4328s aren't half bad themselves. Very good monitors.


Spain. Good call! I've done a bit more insider reading on the JBL LSR6328P and I like them a lot. Currently looking forward to get them. Im sure budget stretching will worth it on going with this monitors.

Now Im leaning torwad Submersive HP too; the more I read about it, the more I want it.


----------

