Hey All,
Five or so years ago, as a grad student, I bought a pair of M3's after reading that they were the best value in speakers. They are amazing value.

I have a cheap surround receiver (Sony STR-DE485) and decided today that it was time to get surround speakers. I impulsively went to best buy and spent $500 on a center (Definitive 1000) and rear (Definitive 800) speakers.

Wow do they suck compared to my M3's! Having the rears obviously added to the soundstage, but turning off the center speaker made everything sound better!
So, my plan is to return them to best buy and stick with axiom. However, I'm still in academia (postdoc), so the budget is a bit tight.

The room i'm in is pretty small. After reading quite a bit on these forums, I am pretty sure I'm going to stick with a phantom center for now.

The options are:
1) Keep my m3's as my fronts and get QS4 rears.
2) Get m22's as fronts and move my m3's to rear.
3) *Splurge* and get M50's for fronts and move my m3's to rear.

The other question is whether a new receiver will give new life to my speakers.
What's the opinion on the R-771 listed on axiom's site? Is it as good value as the speakers?

Thanks!
-Jeff

Jeff, welcome. Considering the budgetary restraints, the best improvement for the least expenditure would be adding QS4 surrounds to your M3s.

No, unless your 485 is dead(or not in good operating condition, at least), a new receiver won't add any more life to your speakers(if more is really needed, better musical material might supply it).

hi Jeff,
i'd agree with John here, think the most logical next step in your upgrade path would be to purchase a pair of QS4s. They are ideally suited to surround duty and should make the most notable difference to your setup.

Jeff,

Another vote for QS4s. Happy listening.

I will just ask if the rears are for movie surrounds or music surround, some like the direct approach for music opposed to the diffuse QS4s, otherwise I too vote QS4's.

QS4's, keep the M3s..

I agree to getting the Qs4's, but I wouldd also look into getting a new receiver, from the looks of the specs on your Sony a new receiver would give you many more options on how you want to listen to movies and music.

I agree with going for the QS4s. I wouldn't invest in another center until you can match the center to your mains, otherwise you will suffer the same disappointing effect again. Save up for an Axiom center to match.

Just because I was curious from all I read on these boards, (I often feel strangely compelled to prove odd things for myself when I'm bored) I tried using an old HK bookshelf instead of my VP150 that nicely matches my M60s. Even though I still consider the HK bookshelf a nice speaker in it's price category, it just didn't match the sound of my M60s and my sound got kinda muddied.

That being said, I'd probably leave the center purchase until the very last and if you ever do get additional funds to expand, I'd get a subwoofer before reinvesting in another center. As you said, you can do phantom center for now, but it's hard to invent a phantom sub.

Thanks for everyone's advice. It is very strange (but comforting) that everyone had the same advice.
To JohnK : My 485 sounds fine to me, but I often wondered what I was missing by using a cheap receiver. (This could probably be its own post).

To JakeWash: I do listen to a lot of music. But the reason for getting surrounds is for movies. I did notice that some strongly ambient music like radiohead and bjork seemed to benefit from the surround processing modes but for the most part just playing through the fronts sounded better for music. Maybe with the QS4s i'll feel differently. Bottom line : surrounds for movies.

I put in an order for QS4's today!

Good choice with the QS4's.

I'm surprised no one else mentioned it yet, but when you look at getting a center channel you may want to pick up a single M3. This way you will have a perfect timber match across the front and others have mentioned that you should also have a wider dispersion.

HAY: I was thinking about getting a single M3 as a center. But center's and front's always have different geometry, and i assumed that was for a good reason. I suppose it is a pretty cheap way to get a center (about half of the VP100), but i think i'll just save up for a real center.

I've also become more aware (from reading the boards here and other places) that a the main reason for the center is so that people sitting outside of the sweet spot still experience dialogue and other 'on screen' sounds as coming from the screen. Usually i don't host movie parties, it is just me and my girl, so this hasn't been a big issue.

Actually the main reason for the horizontal position is for it to fit better on top or below the TV as vertical speakers are harder to place. Hutzal has 2 vertical M2s and he loves them. The best sound would be 3 of the same speakers across the front.

As Jason mentioned, I have 2 M2s for my centre...and contrary to what you may think, the reason centre channels look the way they do is because they are designed to go above or below a TV, it it not necessarily better to have a real centre. In your case, I would most definatly recommended trying an M3 centre, you will probably like it better than having a VP100 or a VP150.

Speakers in general are designed to be vertically orientated...centre channels are horizontal for functionality, not because they sound better that way.

What they both said

I have a vertical and inverted single M3 as center and am real happy with it's presentation.

....I would also like a second one!

But yup; stuck in the middle of two more M3s as mains is a great solution.

And if for some reason your room should grow and you decide on a pair of M50s in the future; the M3 is still a perfect center.

Works great in my system!

Thanks everyone!

I think I will sometime in the near future get a single M3 center.

My QS4's arrived on friday. Unfortunately, I was heading to New York for the weekend so i didn't get to try them until sunday night.
When i got back, i mounted them and put on the Matrix. It was AWESOME. I was just going to test it, but i was so drawn in to the movie that i ended up watching the whole thing. I can't wait to re-watch Fight Club and the remastered StarWars DVDs.

One thing i realized, which was key, was that i had to change a setting in "DVD Player".

I use a MacMini as my home theater DVD player, hooked up to a Dell 24" widescreen LCD via DVI for video and hooked up to my Sony DE485 via digital optical for audio. The Mac does an amazing job of upconverting DVDs to the 1920X1200 pixels of the monitor. The default in DVD player is to decode the DVD audio in the computer and send the signal over as PCM. But there is a preference (poorly named) which send the dolby digital track directly to the optical output. That made all the difference!

F107: Why did you invert your M3?