Can I go wrong with this? Axioms with H/K HT

After hours of research devoted to a new 7.1 HT set-up (my current recevier is a 10-year old Sony), here is my tentative plan: M22 fronts, VP150 center, QS8 side surrounds, M2 rears, with a Hsu VTF-2 or VTF-3 sub. Room is approximately 20 by 15 by 8 plus. Couch is 10 feet back from TV and 7 to 8 feet from rear wall. I am thinking the H/K AVR 630 may be a good match for sound and bass handling flexibility (each channel). Any thoughts would be appreciated. Great forum!!

I'd skip the rear channels (the M2i's) and put that money towards upgrading the M22's to M60's. You've got a good size room. That would make a bigger improvement in sound over the two additional rear channels. The QS8 surrounds are amazing. A pair of them at your sides will pretty much illiminate any need for additional channels to your rear.

Other than that suggestion, it sounds like you've got a great plan.

Good luck!

I'm going to get nitpicky again (sorry Spiff).
This is the only forewarning.

[nitpicking]
I frown at this frequently stated concept of "upgrading" from M22s to M60s.
There is no upgrade from the smaller to the larger.
They are two speaker sizes/styles for moderately different applications which both sound so similar that one certainly is no better than the other. (I've had both and own the M60s).

In a smaller room, i think the M60s would be impossible to work with. It would not be considered much of an 'upgrade' from the M22s, yet for some reason, it keeps getting mentioned as the upgrade from the M22s.
Has anyone ever asked about using the M60s in a small room and actually have someone reply:
"Hey, your choice of the M60s is excellent but you should consider "downgrading" to the M22s based on your room size"
[/nitpicking]

Just a thought.

In a room that size, the M60's would be in upgrade. In a large room, the M60 will sound better than the M22's. Is that not an upgrade?

I listened to both the M22 and M60's in my room, and the M60's were simply better. Again, in my room. Before I suggest to people that they get the M60's over the M22, I always am sure that the room size they are in and the distance they'll be sitting from the speakers makes the suggestion valid. In the above case, I think it is.

Spiff,

I know that you do not find the extra channels to be worthwhile, but I however, do. I love the rear surround field I recieve from my 3 QS8's. I always smile when there is a discrete sound effect from the rear. It is a very cool effect. And my room is not that big! Only 12X18.

Although I do agree that he may be better off getting the M60's now and doing the eventual upgrade to getting back surrounds when his budget allows it. The back surround effects are not cool enough to warrant getting what could be considered by some to be a lesser speaker.

In reply to:
In a large room, the M60 will sound better than the M22's.

Why?
Because they play louder?
The quality of sound itself has not changed, only volume (removing the extra bass extension from the equation here).

In reply to:
Is that not an upgrade?

More volume can be considered an upgrade certainly, but the connotation of using the word makes it sound like the M60 is superior in overall quality from the M22 and to that i disagree especially if that difference is only in regards to volume level.

More to my main thought, for a small room, ppl may tell someone that the M60s are really too big for such a space but the word "downgrade" to describe the choice of M22 over M60 is never used.

Actually, I was thinking that the M22 would be sufficient - great mid and high range, with a good sub to care of the low range. Given the entire seating area is actually only 12 by 14, I thought the rears in back would round it out. Also, the bass management of H/K would allow for all base from any channel to be routed to sub. To me, the M60s would be too big for front. If you have great sub, why have the bass come from the fronts? Besides, I think the H/K and M22 will be able to play much louder than I can stand. Does any one have any experience listening to Logic 7 (H/K) or DLP IIx with direct radiating rear speakers?

The difference between the M22's and the M60's was certainly more than volume levels. I A/B'd the two in my livingroom for nearly a week.

The M60's were more open, and had better separation. The M60's soundstage was larger - both R/L and forward and back. At loud volumes, the M22ti could start to become a bit shrill, trying to fill that large room, whereas the M60ti's would show no signs of strain at volumes far louder than I'd ever need to listen to.

Yes, they have a VERY similar tone. They sound nearly same, it's more of how that sound is presented which differs with the two speakers.

I also agree that if you have a small room, and have the M22's, switching to the M60's could be considered a "downgrade". The M60's need space for their benefits over the M22's to be appreciated.

I think you may be getting too hung up on the terminology. Forget "upgrade" or "downgrade". The M60's may be the more appropriate speaker for a larger room. Is that better?

In reply to:
Room is approximately 20 by 15 by 8 plus. Couch is 10 feet back from TV and 7 to 8 feet from rear wall.

In reply to:
...entire seating area is actually only 12 by 14

That's a pretty big difference. How big is your room? 20x15 or 12x14? Based on the original quote of 20x15 with 10' of space from the mains, I stand by my recommendation of the M60's. If the room is 12x14, how far back will you be? With that size room, the M22's may indeed be the better choice.

The seating area occupies 12 by 14, if you make a rectangle between TV and seating. But the overall room is 20 by 15. There is empty space in the back not part of TV viewing area. So the listening area is really 12 by 14 in a 20 by 15 room. That's why I want rears, to take advantage of the couch being 7 to 8 feet from rear wall. My spacing looks pretty much like Dolby shows their 7.1 layout on their website. It is supposedly better to have the couch not on the back wall when possible. Does that clarify? I realize I was confusing before.

Gotcha. That's a very similar setup that I have. My room is about 27x17x9. I sit about 13' back, and have an additional 10+' behind me. Before you spend the money on those rear speakers, I think you should seriously consider hearing the QS8's on their own first. If you're not blown away, then go ahead and order the rears.

It's also still a good size room for the M60's. You may not be sitting 15' back, but the room is still that size. The sound still needs to fill the whole room, not just the 12x14 area.

It's a bit pricier idea, but you get the 60's and 22's. If you don't think the 60's are better, send them back and use the M22's. If you like them better, you could put the M22's in the rear. I know M22's in the rear is overkill, but it would solve a couple of issues/questions.

In reply to:
Does any one have any experience listening to Logic 7 (H/K) or DLP IIx with direct radiating rear speakers?

You could take a look at this link that i posted quite some time ago about QS8s vs M22s as surrounds.
It will at least give you one opinion on the subject.

In reply to:
The difference between the M22's and the M60's was certainly more than volume levels.

I agree with you here Spiff. I actually liked the sound of the M60s more than the M22s.
It was more than just outright volume and more about the broader soundstage. I also found the soundstage of the M60s to be larger, more robust almost (but again the extended bass factor of the M60s cannot be directly compared with the lack of same in the M22) but based on my past speaker experience, i would generally expect a larger soundstage with larger enclosure sizes. This thought has held true with our latest Tannoy additions in which they were another step larger than the Axioms M60s.

I did not find that the M60s were any different in treble (openess or separation) over the M22s though. In utilizing an identical tweeter, crossover point and box design, i find it hard how this could be obtained. Perhaps Alan would have some insight based on the listening tests they've done.

In reply to:
They sound nearly same, it's more of how that sound is presented which differs with the two speakers....The M60's need space for their benefits over the M22's to be appreciated

I completely, thoroughly and happily, merrily agree.

In reply to:
I think you may be getting too hung up on the terminology

That was my point.
I DID warn you i was being nitpicky.
Word selection means a whole lot in science publications so the broad use of specific terminology always causes a twitch in the 'ol eyebrow area.
Just call me nitpicky...

Or maybe even 'twitchy'

I shouldn't have said the M60's were more open. Bad choice of words. Their soundstage is wider. That's what I meant by open in that case. My bad.

Thanks for the link chessero. I was actually referring to the direct radiating for the rear centers or back surrounds of you prefer. I definitely plan on QS8s for the side surrounds to get the enveloping sound. Some companies recommend direct radiating rear surrounds.

Wow. The comic relief leaves for a few days and look what happens: two respected forum regulars (henceforth known as "The Scientist" and "The Layman") go at it.

We may have "gone at it", but gloves were definately on, as well as full protective head gear. I nice civilized discussion.

What full protective head gear are we talking about?...you talkng about that dickie again.

If you are going to use your system for multichannel audio, I think the setup you are considering will be ideal. directing the surround channels from a 5.1 DVD-A or SACD to M2's positioned behind the listener will sound much better than using QS8's. If you are definitely not going to play DVD-A or SACD, then the idea of getting the M60's for fronts and possibly getting a third QS8 down the road for the rear channel is a viable one.

Mark