Skip to main content

Hi

My current setup is an Era 100 in my bedroom and a Beam 2 in my living room with my LG tv.

I live in an apartment building, so my couch is flush against the wall in my 230 sq ft living room.

I was planning on upgrading my living room setup during this Black Friday / holiday season for an improves sound..

Would you guys say that having a Beam 2 paired with 2xEra 100 speakers as surrounds with wall mounts would significantly improve the listening experience, as opposed to buying an Arc Ultra (after selling the Beam 2)?

I am not too fond of the idea of installing wall mounts next to my couch due to aesthetic reasons. I'm also aware that the ideal surround speakers placement would be behind the couch, which is not applicable in my case. I will however prioritize an option that will yield a better listening experience over aesthetics. I know the Arc Ultra is a significant improvement over the Beam 2, I am just not sure how well it can mimic a surround sound  experience.

Adding a Sub Mini to my setup might be of interest as well in the coming future..

Thanks for any replies

I'd say from a purely sound from the rear standpoint the Beam / 100 is going to be best.

Personally that would be way down my list of reasons for picking speakers. Yes rear sound is nice but the far superior front sound stage imaging of the Ultra plus the height channels and LFE enhancements would far outweigh having a bit of noise behind me.

Hi Stanley,

Thank you for replying

Would you say the the Arc Ultra would produce a surround sound like effect by itself without needing surround speakers like the Era 100?

Not surround sound but Atmos that is quite different. Read a couple Atmos articles to get an idea of how it works.

The Ultra is going to sound better than a non-Atmos front speaker, better than an Atmos front speaker with fewer speaker channels and better than the original Arc due to all the updates/upgrades.

Adding rear speakers would give you sound from the rear, much better sound from the 300s due to their multiple channels than the 100s and I think the 100s are better than the older Ones but I haven’t done more than skim that topic. Others here may have a better comparison. 

Will the Arc Ultra sound better alone than a Beam 2 that is paired with Sub Mini and two Era 100s? Or will the combined abilities of the later setup produce better sound quality than the Arc Ultra by itself?

I don’t own both devices, but given the sales price, I’d certainly think the Arc Ultra, with its many additional Atmos drivers, and width, would sound ‘better’ than any Beam. But ’sounds better’ is a subjective measurement, you may want to visit a local retailer and listen to them yourself to make your own determination. 

And if you already have the Sub mini, and Era 100s, there’s no reason why they couldn’t be added to the Arc Ultra. 

Will the Arc Ultra sound better alone than a Beam 2 that is paired with Sub Mini and two Era 100s? Or will the combined abilities of the later setup produce better sound quality than the Arc Ultra by itself?

You have to define “better” as there are many aspects to be considered and trying to total them up like a grocery bill isn’t a realistic approach.

What are your basic criteria for designing a sound system?

What are your minimum needs?

Things like frequency response, volume, room-filling, stereo imaging, Atmos, LFE ability.

 

I have an Arc, Arc Ultra and Beam gen 1. I have Ones and 100s as surrounds and Sub gen 1 and a Sub 4, but no mini so once I understand what you are asking I might be able to help more.

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings