# 3.1 vs 2.1 Speaker Setups - Value Of Third Channel



## bayareagadgets

Good morning, and thank you for any thoughts on this subject.

I am a technology integrator who primarily serves women and families who enjoy home entertainment but often opt not to have surround speakers because they either find the surround experience disruptive or the home is not rear speaker friendly. They also don't like floor standing speakers, and home construction oftern precludes in-ceiling speakers.

Our signature "look" is framing a display with left, center, right on-wall speakers from Monitor Audio, Definitive, Totem, and Leon. The bass is anchered with a SuperCube III or II subwoofer. My clients enjoy the look and experience, but my lead installer is now becoming argumentative about the role / value of the center channel speaker. He believes the client is being oversold.

I suppose I could tell him to shut up and do what he's paid to do, but I'd rather have a more reasoned dialogue. I've heard the arguments about 2 better speakers vs. 3 lesser, but we use the most costly speakers in a line in most scenarios anyway, and price has never been an issue with our users.

Personally, I prefer the 3.1 configuration in my own home which has no back wall for surrounds. Am I missing something in adding the center channel. An what are your thoughts on which sound format to use with this configuration?

Have a great week,

James


----------



## bayareagadgets

*2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

EDIT by Admin: Threads combined... please see rules concerning cross-posting.


----------



## lsiberian

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



bayareagadgets said:


> Good morning, and thank you for any thoughts on this subject.
> 
> I am a technology integrator who primarily serves women and families who enjoy home entertainment but often opt not to have surround speakers because they either find the surround experience disruptive or the home is not rear speaker friendly. They also don't like floor standing speakers, and home construction oftern precludes in-ceiling speakers.
> 
> Our signature "look" is framing a display with left, center, right on-wall speakers from Monitor Audio, Definitive, Totem, and Leon. The bass is anchered with a SuperCube III or II subwoofer. My clients enjoy the look and experience, but my lead installer is now becoming argumentative about the role / value of the center channel speaker. He believes the client is being oversold.
> 
> I suppose I could tell him to shut up and do what he's paid to do, but I'd rather have a more reasoned dialogue. I've heard the arguments about 2 better speakers vs. 3 lesser, but we use the most costly speakers in a line in most scenarios anyway, and price has never been an issue with our users.
> 
> Personally, I prefer the 3.1 configuration in my own home which has no back wall for surrounds. Am I missing something in adding the center channel. An what are your thoughts on which sound format to use with this configuration?
> 
> Have a great week,
> 
> James
> 
> Read more: 3.1 vs 2.1 Speaker Setups - Value Of Third Channel - Home Theater Forum - Home Theater Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...e-third-channel.html#post245668#ixzz0iFTqQpDc


The two main problems with Center Channels are distance for the mains(L,R) and off-axis response. 

If the Center Channel is too close to the Mains(within 3 feet) it can interfere with the sound stage of the Mains reducing sound quality. 

If you are using a horizontal center chances are it has terrible off-axis response. However using the same L-R speaker vertically under a display is a good solution for that.

Still most folks care more about aesthetics than sound. If they cared so much about sound they'd not want in-walls. Plus you probably need the extra income to stay alive.

I do phantom the center in my setup, but I have a smaller room.


----------



## lsiberian

Welcome I answered your question in another topic.


----------



## bayareagadgets

Thank you. I'm still finding my way around bulleting boards.

James


----------



## bayareagadgets

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

Thanks for the update. The typical configuration is 3 on-wll Monitor AudioRadius HD 250s which are 29" tall / wide, depending on orientation. Most displays are 52-55" and we put the "framed" speakers about 3-4" out from the sides of the display. From a purist standpoint, we know this isn't optimal, but we're turning business away so we assume our clients a pleased with the result.

JS


----------



## tonyvdb

Hi James, Welcome aboard,

The center channel is designed for dialogue and thus is an important part of the front sound stage however if the speakers are not a close match or the left and right channels are close together (less that 4' apart) the center can actually cause issues. 
Many people opt to go without a center channel due to aesthetics and "phantom" the dialogue to the mains. This can work well but this removes the anchor of the dialogue coming from the screen and can be problematic.


----------



## bayareagadgets

Good feedback. 

Surprisingly, 80% of our clients like the look of the under display center channel which are always identical to the L/Rs. I suspected the dialogue is enhanced over straight L/R. That's my experience at home. But, I wanted an additional data point.

All the best,

James


----------



## lsiberian

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



bayareagadgets said:


> Thanks for the update. The typical configuration is 3 on-wll Monitor AudioRadius HD 250s which are 29" tall / wide, depending on orientation. Most displays are 52-55" and we put the "framed" speakers about 3-4" out from the sides of the display. From a purist standpoint, we know this isn't optimal, but we're turning business away so we assume our clients a pleased with the result.
> 
> JS


I think most folks will perceive a center as making the sound better so you are better off putting it in. Psycho acoustics is hard to argue against. Congrats on the success.


----------



## drdoan

Welcome James. Have fun. Dennis


----------



## recruit

Yes welcome to the best forums on the net :bigsmile:


----------



## hearingspecialist

I would say it also depends on the processing being used. Are all three speakers (L, R, C) all voiced? I'm sure they are but point is how the signal is being split up imo. My system is a 4.2 setup with no center mainly because the mains are 60 inches apart and my sitting area is 11 feet back. Do I need a center when my image is super strong as it is???


----------



## mechman

Welcome James. :wave:


----------



## hearingspecialist

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

I do love the McIntosh:

XCS2K 
Reference Center Channel Loudspeaker

Holy !!! 3 12's in a center channel down to 16hz!!!! If I could only sell one of my kidneys....


----------



## Toby Jack

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

As I started piecing together a 5.1 setup I began with only purchasing the left, right and center channel speakers. I maintained a 3.1 setup for quite a while and noticed a few things. First, my L&R mains were so close to the center that it often didn't make a difference if I was in surround mode or stereo mode. In fact, I often preferred stereo mode because dialog was shared by two speakers and was louder and thus easier to understand. The illusion of surround is lost using stereo but when the L,C,R are close together it often doesn't matter anyway. 

From the sound of things, your customers are more critical of aesthetics than sound realism. I would suggest investing more in a nice 2.1 setup rather than the 3.1 like you mentioned.


----------



## JCD

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

I think I'd go with a 2.1 setup with better speakers. If your clients are into aesthetics over sound, then getting rid of a speaker can only help and a properly set up left/right speaker can sound like you've got a center. My standard advice is to buy in the following order:

Front left/right
sub
back surrounds
center
side surrounds

It's not that I think the center isn't important -- most movie's have most of the sound coming out of the center -- just that it can be done with out with a properly set up left/right.


----------



## selden

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

Don't forget that having a center speaker is important when entertaining guests who are not seated in the middle between the Left and Right speakers.

Multichannel audio mixes have the voices predominantly coming from the center channel so that they seem to be coming from the TV. Without a center speaker, voices seem to be coming from the speaker that's closest to you and not from the TV. That can be quite distracting.


----------



## eugovector

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

Ditto to selden.


----------



## MatrixDweller

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

If the inclusion if in-wall speakers is just to give the TV better speakers then a 2.1 is more than adequate. Pretty much all TVs only have LF/RF speakers and a lot of people are happy with that. I doubt that your average (non-audiophile) consumer is not going to complain that dialog is not very good off axis.

I guess the real thing to do would be to test out the 2.1 setup and compare it to a 3.1 setup. Invite in a few people that meet your customer demographic and get their opinions of the test set up and also about what they truly want in a system (VOC). 

You could always offer 2.1 as your base package and offer 3.1, 5.1 and 7.1 as upgrades.


----------



## glaufman

Welcome James! I ran phantom center (without a center channel speaker) for years and loved it. I only added a center channel when I changed locations and the layout of my room now demands it, as there is important seating much closer to the left speaker than the right. I found that in previuos setups that were fairly symetrical, with the seating a good distance from either L or R speaker, the dialog anchored to the screen nicely without a center, and saved me cost. That being said, IF there's going to be a center speaker, it had better be a good one, and had better be designed to work with the L and R speakers (ideally it would be identical, but aesthetics often precludes this). I experimented with using my TV speakers as the center speaker, but found this completely unacceptable.


----------



## FlashJim

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



bayareagadgets said:


> I suppose I could tell him to shut up and do what he's paid to do


That gets my vote.


----------



## Sir Terrence

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*

I would never design a system without a center speaker, that is a pretty evil compromise. However, since the system is already compromised by the lack of surround speakers, I would do exactly what the client wants. Obviously they are not looking for a complete or well designed system, so what they are looking for is the prime concern for any installer. 

If I do not have a back wall, I look for other alternatives, like in ceiling speakers. From a listening perspective it is not optimal, but it does complete the system. 

I always talk to my clients about what is optimal for their rooms, what compromises they want to make, and steer them away from major compromises(such as no center or surrounds). In the end, their needs come first, as you don't want to argue your business out the door.


----------



## Toby Jack

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



Sir Terrence said:


> I would never design a system without a center speaker, that is a pretty evil compromise. However, since the system is already compromised by the lack of surround speakers, I would do exactly what the client wants. Obviously they are not looking for a complete or well designed system, so what they are looking for is the prime concern for any installer.
> 
> If I do not have a back wall, I look for other alternatives, like in ceiling speakers. From a listening perspective it is not optimal, but it does complete the system.
> 
> I always talk to my clients about what is optimal for their rooms, what compromises they want to make, and steer them away from major compromises(such as no center or surrounds). In the end, their needs come first, as you don't want to argue your business out the door.


I imagine a perfectly calibrated & imaged 7.1 set up is not what every customer needs or wants. And many times a customer (particularly the less knowledgeable ones) will be asking for your advice on how it should be set up and not the other way around. If all they are looking for is better sound than what they are getting from their television, a nice simple stereo setup will be more than enough for them. I doubt they are going to walk away feeling like their setup has been compromised.


----------



## Sir Terrence

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



Toby Jack said:


> I imagine a perfectly calibrated & imaged 7.1 set up is not what every customer needs or wants. And many times a customer (particularly the less knowledgeable ones) will be asking for your advice on how it should be set up and not the other way around. If all they are looking for is better sound than what they are getting from their television, a nice simple stereo setup will be more than enough for them. I doubt they are going to walk away feeling like their setup has been compromised.


One of the things I have learned is that there is reality, and there is opinion. It may be the opinion of the customer that he is not compromising his hometheater by going stereo instead of 5.1 or 7.1, but the reality is they are. On occasion while putting together a system for a client, I meet up with the WAF. I am usually asked if the system can do without x or x because it does not look very good(usually speakers). 

So that you understand my perspective, I mix both stereo and multichannel audio and film soundtracks. The studio I work for has done many listening test of multichannel soundtracks being played back on a two channels system, and what we heard in many cases(as compared to the 5.1 or 7.1 setup) is a compromise in the clarity of the dialog when in the presence of loud sound effects and music. When a center speaker is present and calibrated with the rest of the system, that negative effect disappears. 

If visuality is an issue, I will reluctantly go with in walls.


----------



## lsiberian

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



Sir Terrence said:


> One of the things I have learned is that there is reality, and there is opinion. It may be the opinion of the customer that he is not compromising his hometheater by going stereo instead of 5.1 or 7.1, but the reality is they are. On occasion while putting together a system for a client, I meet up with the WAF. I am usually asked if the system can do without x or x because it does not look very good(usually speakers).
> 
> So that you understand my perspective, I mix both stereo and multichannel audio and film soundtracks. The studio I work for has done many listening test of multichannel soundtracks being played back on a two channels system, and what we heard in many cases(as compared to the 5.1 or 7.1 setup) is a compromise in the clarity of the dialog when in the presence of loud sound effects and music. When a center speaker is present and calibrated with the rest of the system, that negative effect disappears.
> 
> If visuality is an issue, I will reluctantly go with in walls.


Were the listening tests done with blind ABX testing? 

Also were the center channels at the low angle his customers are? 

In some environments a phantom center has been a better option. IME


----------



## Sir Terrence

*Re: 2.1 vs. 3.1 Speaker Setups - Your Thoughts On The Center Channel*



lsiberian said:


> Were the listening tests done with blind ABX testing?


It was a blind test, but not using a ABX. We hid three identical speakers behind a curtain, with a computer randomly selecting the playback format. Each passage was optimumly mixed for the playback format it represented. 



> Also were the center channels at the low angle his customers are?


The object was not to create a compromised listening test. 



> In some environments a phantom center has been a better option. IME


In our particular test this was not our conclusion. We found that phantom images sounded diffused and recessed when compared with a hard center channel. We also found (with measurements) that the stereo speakers reproduction of centrally located sounds had more bass in them because they were being reproduced by speakers that were closer to the side walls. With a hard center speaker, there was no change in timbre because it was further away from the side walls. Unless you were a lone listener sitting exactly in between the stereo speakers, the sound you hear will pull to the speaker nearest where you sit if off axis. This does not lock in the center image for off axis viewers at the center of the screen(where it should be), which proved distracting to everyone. Also when measured using a dummy head measuring system, we found a notch in the output of mono images that coincided with the width of speaker placement. In our particular setup it was between 1-4khz. 

I guess my last reason is a personal one. I mix soundtracks and multichannel audio tracks with a center speaker. The balance of the mix is based on a 5.1 speaker configuration, not a two channel one. I guess I am somewhat of a purist in that I play back the source with the same channel figuration as it was created. Stereo mixes are played back in stereo, multichannel audio and soundtracks are played back in 5.1 or 7.1.(or 4.0 and 4.1). In most situations compromises have to be made. I try to choose the ones that do the least amount of damage to the ultimate presentation.


----------



## Allan

I'm a big fan of actual experience. Why don't you take your installer to a sample of locations and listen to television using both set-ups. 

My current system is a Denon 1910 receiver, PSB Image fronts and center and a Velodyne sub. I've experimented with this setup and prefer 3.1 over 2.1 for television watching. The quality of the speakers allows 2.1 to be perfectly acceptable, but 3.1 is superior for voices. Now if you want to talk music I much prefer vintage 2.0, but that's another topic altogether.

Allan


----------

