Improving sound from flat screen TV?
Wife wants rid of the monoliths that are my HIFI speakers and which we currently use to improve sound from the TV… but what other options are there for improved sound without filling the room with speakers?
Not to bothered about the full surround sound experience (won’t miss what we don’t have already).
Would like it to be able play music half decently (although proper HIFI will be moving to it’s own dedicated space *yes*).
Any suggestions?Posted 5 years agoCaptJonMember
What’s the budget? This is pretty decent, certainly an improvement over TV speakers:Posted 5 years agosimon_gSubscriber
Soundbar as said, or there are some good 2.1 systems with subtle little speakers, assuming you can hide the sub away somewhere.
Or just get some smaller speakers – eg. http://www.whathifi.com/review/acoustic-energy-compact-1Posted 5 years ago
TV sound is a funny old business. Somehow seeing the pictures make the sound seem much better. I’ve got cheap “proper” surround sound (ie not a supermarket job) and it sounds great for movies and tv, but terrible when playing CDs through it.
5.1 systems that sound good for actual music listening are really expensive, Arcam do one, Muso I think it’s called. Or Solo.Posted 5 years agoCountZeroMember
As binners says, get a proper 5.1 surround set-up, the sub can be hidden away behind the telly, or the sofa, which is where mine is, and the little satellite speakers go up on the wall, where they are hardly noticeable. If you can spend a bit, then KEF or B&W do some beauties. If you’re replacing a quality pair of big boxes, then good quality speakers will give you good music repro as well, which is how my system is set up. If you’re not bothered about 5.1, then 3.1 would probably do, but a good surround really can make a difference when watching TV; you’d be surprised how often proper surround adds atmosphere to TV programmes, not just to movies, people talking behind you, doors slamming, cars and other vehicles moving behind, etc.Posted 5 years ago
To be honest I’ve found that surround sound doesn’t make a fat lot of difference. Most of the action is in front, and it seems most films just stick a token rear door slamming effect in occasionally just for the sake of it.
That may come down to how you have set it up. If you don’t use digital cables you will only get psuedo surround sound, if you don’t have a sub woofer or a decent amp etc.
Are the sources you are using surround sound?
Saw some stuff at the w/e and they came over really well – even though they weren’t bang and crash specials.Posted 5 years ago
I have all the gear don’t worry. It’s a Marantz 5.1 AV amp supplied in full DTS from blu rays played on a PS3, correctly configured and connected via optical cable. As I said, the surround sound WORKS FINE because you can hear the effects coming from all around you. It’s just that the effects aren’t very often ON THE FILM ITSELF, and when they are, it doesn’t add much to the action. It’s more distracting than immersive.
This is also true for most cinema films. I think it’s to do with the fact that the angle of view you get from the screen doesn’t match the spacial distribution of the sound. I am looking at a flat image on a screen with a distorted perspective relative to where I am sitting. If I were much closer to the screen it might work better.Posted 5 years ago
I was watching Pacific on Bluray through the 5.1 surround sound last night, with the bass turned up on the sub woofer
Sound wise, It was like their was an actual war going on in the front room. Not everybodies bag obviously, but I’d guess its most blokes idea of perfect telly 😉Posted 5 years agoampthillSubscriber
We went through the same thing. I am really quite keen on HiFi but it suddenly hit me that 95% of the use was Tv related and the speakers were really in the way.
Of to richer sounds for a receiver and Boston acoustics xs speaker package
Speakers are discrete and film and TV sound much better. its not just about rear effects. Voices are easier to boost with the centre channel. Base is great.
The only down side is music is less good but still better than say an iPod doc or mini system
I think we spent under 400 with cables (a cheap real from a day shop)Posted 5 years agomessiahMember
Thanks for the information folks… I’d never heard of soundbars before 😳
More discussion last night. She is happy to have a pair of speakers if they are “attractive and/or small” rather than the Monoliths I have (Dynaudio’s on lead shot filled Atacama stands).
She wouls also rather it did music well than movie sound so need for a full AV package 😀
There is hope that I can keep it HIFIPosted 5 years agothx1138Member
She is happy to have a pair of speakers if they are “attractive and/or small”
How many blokes do I know whose partners say exactly the same thing? ‘Can’t we get rid of those horrible ugly things?’ They have a point though; spend time and money furnishing your home the way you like it, then plonk two great carbuncles in and ruin it all.
My wife is the same; I’m trying to persuade her that we need something Danish:
Posted 5 years agotinybitsMember
I bought a samsung soundbar for this very reason. Works very well. It’s far better than the TV speakers, with a decent wireless sub. Fits under the TV well and the wife thinks it looks good. on the plus side, as I also have a Samsung TV, it’s got rid of one remote as well. Always a bonus.Posted 5 years ago
This is the one:
The topic ‘Improving sound from flat screen TV?’ is closed to new replies.