Quantcast

Scripti or Cinemai for surround channel?

MartinLogan Owners (MLO)

Help Support MartinLogan Owners (MLO):

K

kdiddy

Guest
What would give me better performance as dedicated surrounds? I have heard the Cinemai as a center channel, and i thought it sounded great. The Cinemai's would be a little more for the pair, but they are a little more compact compared to the Scripti's, which may work better in my set up. Any suggestions are welcome.
 

roberto

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
3,269
Reaction score
70
Location
San Jose, Costa Rica
kdiddy said:
What would give me better performance as dedicated surrounds? I have heard the Cinemai as a center channel, and i thought it sounded great. The Cinemai's would be a little more for the pair, but they are a little more compact compared to the Scripti's, which may work better in my set up. Any suggestions are welcome.
Hola Kdiddy...as far as I now, the Cinema i is made for center channel only, and the Scripts i are for front or rear...I have never done that...perhaps could work... they are truly different design and it depends a lot of your liking...happy listening,
Roberto.
 
K

kdiddy

Guest
On ML's website and in their books, it says that the cinemai and the theater i can be used as effects channel speakers. Just wondering if anyone has done so. I might have to be the test dummy, haha.
 

Robin

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
3,304
Reaction score
3
Location
Camano Island, Washington
Script i's are awesome speakers....

Kdiddy,

Welcome to the ML Club!

I concidered using Cinema i's as surrounds, for a while... I like the combination of speakers, used in the, Cinema i's hybird design. My only problem was the shape, the concave curve of the Cinema i, electrostatic pannel. IMHO, the concave curve of the electrostatic pannel focuses the Cinema i's sound, causing a smaller sweet spot. I love ML's, curvaliner (convex) designs, which, I believe is true for all of ML other speakers in their product line. ML's other speaker's, electrostatic pannels convex's out, disbursing the sound waves out in a 30 degree angle, causing a larger sweet spot. Please don't get me wrong, I think the Cinema i, is a terrific ML speaker. I just wanted another sound, for my HT and my ears... So, for my system (my ears), I choose the Script i's and I am extremely pleased, with the Script i's performace as surrounds. So much so, I plan to purchase another pair as rears, in the next year or two. I am striving to complete an all ML, 7.1 speaker system in the next five years. I have a dream and it is Martin Logan centered dream. To accumulate an all ML 7.1 system, before I retire...

Ultimatly, "trust your ears", go with what sounds good to you. It's your HT. Your system, and your sound... Good luck.

Again, Welcome!

-Robin
 

jon7988

Active member
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I believe you would use the Cinema, or Theater as a center rear surround (1) only as a 6.1 system. 2 mains, 2 side surounds, 1 CC, 1 sub, and ONE rear center. When you run a 7.1 set-up the (2) rears are in mono, not rear mixed. So it becomes a matter of preference. room size etc. IMO there is very little gain to 7.1 over 6.1, todays 5.1 movies are mixed in a format (such as pro-logic II-X, Dolby-EX) That mixes in the rear sounds also. It is a somewhat "artifical" mixed 6.1 or 7.1 sound of a 5.1 recording giving you "rear effects". However I like side AND rear surround sound on the "right" movies. If you were going to play 5.1 music, SACD's etc, the (2) rears would make more sense, I have never heard the scripts, but would seem by design to be better. That is why I use my Aerius-i as rears. However, I mostly listen to 2 channel music, when I listen to music. There are some really awesome 5.1 SACD's, and others that are ho-hum. There are some thoughts, to the future, as TRUE 7.1 movies recordings would seem logical fairly soon.
 
Last edited:
Top