I had a rather interesting discussion with the owner of a local audio store today. I've been looking around for a new set of main speakers and, of course, this means that I probably should replace my old Optimus center channel one at the same time. This guy's been in business for like thirty years and he's always given me great advice in the past.
I asked him about "matching" the center channel to the mains. Surprisingly, he told me that this notion is somewhat overblown. While he did say that I probably needed to replace the old Ratshack center and that quality is important, the differences in good center channel speakers are minimal at best. He further demonstrated by playing something through his least expensive CC, a $200 Boston CRC, and then his most expensive which went for around $600 (can't remember the make, sorry). I had to admit that the only real difference was in output, something that can easily be adjusted with any decent receiver's settings. He says that the "matching" concept is about 30% real and about 70% that speaker company just wanting to sell their CC speaker to you. I had to admit that there probably was some truth to this.
robert I don't think it's life and death critical.
but I do believe they should be very simular in sound.
so when something pans accross in front of you the tone doesn't change drastically.
so usually the center from the same set matches better than someones old center.
usually the best way to tell if the center from the same set is going to match really well is if it uses the same tweeter and basically same midrange "company/line could be smaller or bigger"
I would say it is real. I started off with a set up speakers and changed the mains. I thought the center was really nice and worked well with the new speakers. When I added a new center which matched the mains, I was amazed at how much better it sounded. It created more of a universal field of sound in front. I would say, from this experience, that the matching center (and the center is one of the important speakers for HT as it handles alot of the dialogue) is very important.
A match as close as possible is the best bet. My main speakers are from the JBL XTi range which starts from small bookshelves to large floorstanders. However, the only matching center was not to my satisfaction as it suited the smaller speakers in the range - not good design I know. Fortunately, a B&W LCR6 series 2 was a decent match for our XT1 60's. Imaging is smooth and even though the JBL's have a higher top end, only a dog would hear that difference.
So IMHO, a center from the same range is a good choice but is not critical providing a close match in timbre is possible.
"But the CC never is exactly like the mains in design any way."
In my world it is. A horizontal d'appolito center is almost unacceptable because of the interference of the mid/bass sounds from the two drivers. A center with different drivers is always unacceptable because of it's the different sound charasteristics.
The best dedicated center speakers on the market are for ex. the B&W HTM7 for the 705's and Tannoy Sensys DCC for the DC1's. They're similar enough to be able to sound the same as the mains.
Most good centers use the same drivers as the mains or at least offer such a center. It is absolutely crucial for the mains and center to match tonally and I think the advice from the 30 year salesman in the original post is just way off the mark. I would add the Monitor Audio Silver center to the list of great centers and the real star of the MA line for the money.
The Silver center looks ok excluding that it's a O-o-O configuration wich causes this comb filter/interference problem. Other well designed, but O-o-O centers are the B&W LCR600 (for 601, 603, 604), JMLab CC700S (for 706S, 716S, 726S) and the Dali Suite series.
A better design is to use a coaxial driver in all speakers so the comb filter effect wont occur and the sound will be tonally the same from all speakers. A good example from this is the KEF Q-series with the Q9C (for Q1 and Q5) and the Q6C (for Qcompact and Q4).