There is a saying about a system being no better than your weakest link... SMART is definately "entry-level" equipment and the processor is definately contributing to your overall sound (as are the amplifiers).

As to the speakers...it really depends on your room. If your room is somewhat dead then direct-radiator type speakers should work fine, if it is live, you should look into horn-loaded systems.

I am not sold on the 3-way concept for cinema sound, it spreads the sound image quite a bit in the vertical dimension, quite un-necessarily. 2-ways systems can generally work for most any theatre.

My favorite direct radiators are the JBL 4675 and the Altec A-6 (No longer available). For horn-loads, I am a die-hard Altec person...A-4s and A-5s but you have to get rid of the Multi-cells and install Altec Manarays (or even a JBL 2360 horn)

The above are opinions so your preference may not agree. I suggest going to some theatres that have different types of speakers in similar rooms and hearing what you think sounds best for you.

Steve

I personally like the JBL 4675, and have good experiences using them. Also, the old Altec A7 was a good speaker for its day, even though I wouldn't try to use them for digital sound.

But good speakers must have the right amps. My experience is that speakers and amps should always be chosen in pairs, because there are speakers that simply won't sound good with the wrong amps. I once tried the LAB500 (THX-approved) amp with the Altec A7, but the sound was never good, no matter what we did.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

I'll stand behind my statement...the SMART equipment are strictly entry level. The ModIIC is what it is, a cheap processor but one can hardly say it is a "good performer." It has shown to be a bit more reliable than some of the other SMART processors but sound wise, it is quite lacking. It's level of quality will most definately affect the quality of the analog AND digital processor connected to it.

>>"I personally like the JBL 4675, and have good experiences using them. Also, the old Altec A7 was a good speaker for its day, even though I wouldn't try to use them for digital sound."<<

You are right, the A-7 isn't a good choice for digital except in the smaller review rooms (40' deep or less) but upgrading it's HF driver and horn to make it an A-5 will make it into a solid performer in small to medium sized rooms). I've done it many times...including pulling direct radiators out (JBL actually) because the room didn't work with that style of speaker.

Steve

There is much wrong with your above statements and MANY MANY double-blind tests on analog vs digital recording to disprove your statements, including the ones about digital compression (including lossy and loss-less) but a more appropiate forum is the group on rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.tech. There is a gentleman over there by the name of Dick Pierce that can explain it far better than I.

Steve

I guess they don't feel a properly adjusted analog A-chain is necessary when they have digital sound. No sound system past, present, or future is perfect. Digital is not perfect, despite what Madison Avenue says. What good is digital sound if it's too quirky? The Dolby Digital and SDDS tracks occupy the worst locations on the film where they are subject to damage by the film gate and rollers that does not affect the picture or analog sound track.

Too often, digital solutions seem like technology for technology's sake. In other words, it's attempting to fix something that really isn't broken. The other problem I have with digital audio and pictures is the bar is set too low with regard to quality. "Let's design a system with the minimum acceptable level of performance and market that" are the watchwords of the digital industry. Analog is simple; few things to go wrong. Digital is complex by its nature; lots to go wrong.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon:

I don't know where the CP-45 came into all of this and I don't know how the CP-45's performance or lack thereof has any bearing on the Mod IIC performance or lack thereof?

Is your arguement that "I would rather have JUNK than CRAP?"

I'm sure an argument can be made that either is better or worse than the other in various respects.

I could probably give the CP-45 the edge in all areas except equalization. And depending on the quality of the installer, a bad installer will get into less trouble with full-octave than 1/3.

Steve