SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE? - Page 22 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: There are many surround speakers out there now, but the ones below would have to get my highest reco
Mirage OMD5 (or any other Mirage Omnipole) 23 22.55%
JBL P520WS / Infinity ES-250 / Infinity Classia C255ES (Dual-monopole for 4 channels from 2 speakers, but also Bipole & Dipole switchable) 4 3.92%
Axiom QS8 or QS4 (Unique Quadpole design) 27 26.47%
Paradigm ADP (Many models available with this design, where the tweeters run Dipole, but the woofers are Bipole) 18 17.65%
Monitor Audio BXFX or RXFX (Single woofer, but the tweeters can switch to either Dipole or Bipole) 13 12.75%
Monitor Audio GXFX (6 drivers, including a ribbon. (Monopole / Dipole switchable) 11 10.78%
KEF 26/2DS (Dipole only, alas... but with two 6.5 inch side woofers and a front-firing 8 inch!!! ) 6 5.88%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 102. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 737 Old 04-30-2014, 07:18 AM
Member
 
Benjitb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: U.K
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28

Hi danielrg,

 

I have recently bought the MA BX Bronze Centre and BX2's, but decided to get cheaper rears in the form of the previous model the BRFX for a 5.0 setup. I got the rears used but have not decided the optimal positioning yet. Here in the UK BXFX new cost £250 (same as BX2 fronts) thats why I didn't get them. But your deal on ebay sounds like a good one. I'd choose the fronts and centre baed on what sounds best before thinking about the bi/dipole surrounds, but if you have any questions in regards to MA you'll be answered much faster at our forum over here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/679047/monitor-audio-owners-thread/10050.

 

I can't answer your other questions because i don't have good knowledge of the other series you're looking at. I am happy with my MA though. Good luck to you

danielrg likes this.

Yamaha RX V-475

Monitor Audio Bronze BX2   Speakers

Monitor Audio Bronze BX     Centre

Monitor Audio Bronze BRFX Rears

FAT PS3

 

Sans subwoofer

Benjitb is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 737 Old 04-30-2014, 07:56 AM
Member
 
Benjitb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: U.K
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28

Hi everyone, I'm after some Rear placement advice for my BRFX's. (Yamaha 475 - MA BX Centre - MA BX2's - MA BRFX's.)

 

The room is approx 13 feet by 11 feet (10 feet in height). Brick walls, wooden floorboards with rugs.

MA BX2's on stands either side of TV. Centre below.

My seating position will be slightly left of centre (or centre if i shuffle the chair over!) about 7 feet from TV/LCR speakers.

 

Please see my diagram/vid below:

 

1. What position would you advise i put the BRFX's in ( Red/ Yellow / Green ) ?

2. What height should they be ? (i've heard ear height)

3. For your chosen position would you put them in Bipole or Dipole.


Yamaha RX V-475

Monitor Audio Bronze BX2   Speakers

Monitor Audio Bronze BX     Centre

Monitor Audio Bronze BRFX Rears

FAT PS3

 

Sans subwoofer

Benjitb is offline  
post #633 of 737 Old 04-30-2014, 08:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielrg View Post

I'm not sure how much I should spend on surrounds.

I have a longer narrow room. I'm pretty much set on getting switchable di/bipole for the sides, and bookshelves for the rear.

On the front I'll have B&W 600 series, or Monitor Audio Bronze, or KEF, or something at that same price range. If I get MA I'll get matching surrounds I think - if I can afford it.

I'm looking at Home Theater Direct Level II di/bipole and bookshelves (<$500), the most I wanted to spend on surrounds was about $1K, maybe get the Axiom QS4 and their small bookshelves for the back.

I'd rather spend $500 than $1000. But wanted to know opinions. Will I notice a huge difference on surrounds between brands or is it more the type of speaker I pick that matters and my preferences?

There's some BXFX new in box on ebay for $220 + $30 shipping. Is that a good deal?

Does this make any sense?

Get surrounds from the same make and model line to timbre match. When surround formats migrate to object based techniques you will be glad you did. The next thing: get monopoles if you possibly can because positional cues are in the mix and you don't want the surround speaker's diffuse dispersal pattern messing that up. That may mean bookshelves depending on the brand and how many types of speakers are in their lineup.
danielrg likes this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #634 of 737 Old 05-01-2014, 07:58 PM
Senior Member
 
danielrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjitb View Post

Hi everyone, I'm after some Rear placement advice for my BRFX's. (Yamaha 475 - MA BX Centre - MA BX2's - MA BRFX's.)

The room is approx 13 feet by 11 feet (10 feet in height). Brick walls, wooden floorboards with rugs.
MA BX2's on stands either side of TV. Centre below.
My seating position will be slightly left of centre (or centre if i shuffle the chair over!) about 7 feet from TV/LCR speakers.

Please see my diagram/vid below:

1. What position would you advise i put the BRFX's in ( Red/ Yellow / Green ) ?
2. What height should they be ? (i've heard ear height)
3. For your chosen position would you put them in Bipole or Dipole.

Well, I'm no expert, but since you posted a reply to me I think I owe you the favor!

I think yellow is bad, due to the nook. I imagine it would muddy the sound to be in the nook.

From what I've read on here, if you pick red you'll want dipole mode. There are others I've seen on here that picked the green location, particularly if they had 5.1. But in that case you aren't in the null anymore so go bipole?

As for ear height, I've read 1-2 ft above seating position and at seating position both. Seems preference comes into it a lot. For those with the speakers so close, I imagine for the red position you'd want them above you so the red isn't right next to your ear. For green maybe one ft higher so the chair is less in the way?

I imagine you'll try them both...

Good luck!

I figure if I give bad advice, then someone will come by to correct me - then I still did you a favor by stirring the hornet's nest! wink.gif
Benjitb likes this.

Electrical engineer by education. Currently a system engineer. I like home automation, theaters, and blinking lights.
Someday it'll be more of an actual hobby - if my employer would ever let me go home!
"The Escape Pod" - My First Theater Build
danielrg is offline  
post #635 of 737 Old 05-01-2014, 08:03 PM
Senior Member
 
danielrg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Get surrounds from the same make and model line to timbre match. When surround formats migrate to object based techniques you will be glad you did. The next thing: get monopoles if you possibly can because positional cues are in the mix and you don't want the surround speaker's diffuse dispersal pattern messing that up. That may mean bookshelves depending on the brand and how many types of speakers are in their lineup.

Yeah, I'd like to do that, but I'm considering making a trade-off here. I want to get pretty nice fronts, and I can't afford in my budget to get matching quality sides and rears. I opted instead to sacrifice on the surround speakers to get nicer ones up front. That means pretty much categorically that I can't afford the same make and model line. Is that a good tradeoff?

My dad's theater room has monos on the side and rear and I like them. I wanted to try something different but perhaps I'll go back to monopoles either way. That's why I shy away from the ebay deals (even though the MA BXFX are tempting) - I want something I can return if I want to try something else.

Later I might have money to upgrade the rears to match the fronts, that's another reason I was thinking of sticking to a budget of $500 for the rears.

Electrical engineer by education. Currently a system engineer. I like home automation, theaters, and blinking lights.
Someday it'll be more of an actual hobby - if my employer would ever let me go home!
"The Escape Pod" - My First Theater Build
danielrg is offline  
post #636 of 737 Old 05-02-2014, 05:24 AM
Member
 
Benjitb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: U.K
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielrg View Post


Well, I'm no expert, but since you posted a reply to me I think I owe you the favor!

I think yellow is bad, due to the nook. I imagine it would muddy the sound to be in the nook.

From what I've read on here, if you pick red you'll want dipole mode. There are others I've seen on here that picked the green location, particularly if they had 5.1. But in that case you aren't in the null anymore so go bipole?

As for ear height, I've read 1-2 ft above seating position and at seating position both. Seems preference comes into it a lot. For those with the speakers so close, I imagine for the red position you'd want them above you so the red isn't right next to your ear. For green maybe one ft higher so the chair is less in the way?

I imagine you'll try them both...

Good luck!

I figure if I give bad advice, then someone will come by to correct me - then I still did you a favor by stirring the hornet's nest! wink.gif


Hi Dan, thanks for the reply, everyone else on this thread seems to have given up the ghost!

 

Red seems far too close, but someone else has said something similar to you and yellow is the typical 5.1 layout. I think i may just have to trial and error positions prior to drilling and see what works best.


Yamaha RX V-475

Monitor Audio Bronze BX2   Speakers

Monitor Audio Bronze BX     Centre

Monitor Audio Bronze BRFX Rears

FAT PS3

 

Sans subwoofer

Benjitb is offline  
post #637 of 737 Old 05-05-2014, 07:09 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Electric_Haggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Thanks Dan.
Sorry to go AWOL...Sometimes there are just nowhere near enough hours in the day!!
mad.gif
Electric_Haggis is offline  
post #638 of 737 Old 05-11-2014, 09:20 AM
Senior Member
 
wyattroa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Any advice from fellow members. In the process of changing out my orb audio system. I have jbl l820 for the front and am either going to put another l820 for a center or lc2 for center. My side surround are my big question. They are ceiling mounted, not ideal, but i have kids and my walls do not give me the options to mount them there. The speakers are 6ft8in from listening position on both sides and 7ft high a foot off the ceiling. They can be adjusted to 6ft off the ceiling. My couch is against the back wall, the speakers will be directly to the sides of us hanging down.

My initial thought was to use two jbl l820 angled down for 5 matching speakers all the way around. But I am wondering if soemthing else would be better for my situation. I notice the omd5 and axiom qs8 have good votes here and I have to say I am intrigued.

Sub build http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...et-r-done.html
Center - JBL LC2
Mains - JBL L820
Surrounds - JBL L820
Sub -Updating to Duals with UXL-18"s A bit different
wyattroa is offline  
post #639 of 737 Old 05-16-2014, 02:57 PM
Senior Member
 
AllenA07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 60
I'm thinking I'm going to add 4 EMP bipole speakers later this year. Anybody have any experience with the EMP surrounds?

AVR: Denon 2112
Speakers: EMP Tek e55ti, Center- EMP Tek e56ci, Side Surrounds- EMP Tek e55wi, Rear Surrounds- KLH 911b, Sub- SVS PC12 Plus
TV: Panasonic 50VT25
Blu-Ray Player:Samsung BD-EM59C;
Playstation 4, Apple TV, Harmony Remote
AllenA07 is offline  
post #640 of 737 Old 05-16-2014, 03:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenA07 View Post

I'm thinking I'm going to add 4 EMP bipole speakers later this year. Anybody have any experience with the EMP surrounds?

What are your front speakers?

If you truly want to be ahead of the game, you'll want your surrounds to be 100% timbre matched to your fronts. If they're EMP surrounds, you'll want the front speakers from the same EMP model family in order to keep the sonic attributes the same as sound effects and dialog travel around the room. That's because surround formats are moving towards a 3D audio/object based approach. Bipoles will probably better than dipoles because they're less diffuse, though every object based home system or rendering studio I've run across have timbre matched monopoles throughout.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #641 of 737 Old 05-16-2014, 03:07 PM
Senior Member
 
AllenA07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

What are your front speakers?

If you truly want to be ahead of the game, you'll want your surrounds to be 100% timbre matched to your fronts. If they're EMP surrounds, you'll want the front speakers from the same EMP model family in order to keep the sonic attributes the same as sound effects and dialog travel around the room. That's because surround formats are moving towards a 3D audio/object based approach. Bipoles will probably better than dipoles because they're less diffuse, though every object based home system or rendering studio I've run across have timbre matched monopoles throughout.

I am running EMP's in the front. I would be staying in the same speaker family so I would be completely Timbre matched.

AVR: Denon 2112
Speakers: EMP Tek e55ti, Center- EMP Tek e56ci, Side Surrounds- EMP Tek e55wi, Rear Surrounds- KLH 911b, Sub- SVS PC12 Plus
TV: Panasonic 50VT25
Blu-Ray Player:Samsung BD-EM59C;
Playstation 4, Apple TV, Harmony Remote
AllenA07 is offline  
post #642 of 737 Old 05-16-2014, 03:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenA07 View Post

I am running EMP's in the front. I would be staying in the same speaker family so I would be completely Timbre matched.

Do you have the E55Ti's up front?

If you have the WAF squared away for your theater space (or you're single), then it might be better to utilize wall mounted monopole E5Bi bookshelves on adjustable brackets for at least the side, back, and front wide surrounds. They have a screw in mounting point on the back unlike some bookshelves. With adjustable mounts, you can then aim the surrounds to get the optimal sound spread in the room. They become more like surrounds seen in a commercial theater venue where the left surround is aimed towards the farthest seated listener's ear level on the right side of the room and vice versa. The rear surrounds are aimed towards the seated listener's ear level in the farthest front of the seating area.

If you have multiple rows of seating, you should have a pair of side wall surrounds for each row. In object based surround, each speaker would be individually addressed by the soundtrack.

No one is quite sure what the optimal position for the top/ceiling height surrounds will be. That would determine the best surround models to use in those positions.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #643 of 737 Old 05-25-2014, 04:32 PM
Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudman View Post

This is not the audio gospel according to Rudman, but simply my personal subjective experience in trying to grapple with this issue...

...To summarise:


1) IF surrounds are within 7 feet, then dipoles and bipoles are preferred.

2) IF more than 7 feet away, then monopoles are at least equal.

3) Any full range surround that moves much air such as a floorstander is preferred (even if you have to mount them on the roof or up on the sidewall! - just how serious are you about your sound?)

4) Multiple side monopole speakers offer by far the most improvement. More than moving from monopole to dipole or bipole.
towers in the side/rear
5) Positioning side (not rear) monopoles firing over the head of listeners were considered inferior.

6) Dipoles have a narrow edge over bipoles. This appears to be material dependent. If explosions, rain etc. If single voice, then the other way round.

7) Having to switch speaker mode depending on material - not for me.

8) Using different speaker brands for main LCR > disliked.

9) Using different speaker brands for surrounds > hardly noticed, unless mixing point source and electrostatics...


I found these points to be true, but I will add some of my own:

1) I found that mixing side surrounds and rear surrounds that are dipole for one set and monopole for the other set leads to a scenario where the direct-radiating monopoles drown out the more diffuse dipoles. It is not that the monopoles are louder, but their more coherent presentation is more noticeable and distracts from the diffuse sound of the dipoles next to them. If you are planning on using dipoles, you should probably use them for all the side/rear surround speakers, regardless of how far from the listener the back or side wall is. I also found that (for discrete multichannel i.e. 7.1 at least) using mismatched speaker brand/technology in the surround channels is even worse than mixing monopole and dipole. This is a warning to anyone contemplating an HTIB set where the rear surrounds are cheap full-range drivers that do not match the rest of the channels. The sound may not be blatantly inferior but it is obviously inferior nonetheless, since I noticed it.

2) I found that, even though the diffuse sound of dipoles across the side/rear surround stage creates a nice, spacious, larger-than-the-room effect (especially in a smallish room like mine), I prefer monopoles even in my smallish room. The sound of a jet flying overhead toward the rear (or front) of the room seems to fizz out and widen when it is in the rear. This makes locating the side/rear surround 'image' in your mind much more difficult and lends an aura of unreality to the sound. Music sounds bad through dipoles, unless it is a surround recording of a live performance with the performers in front and audience-only ambience in the side/rear. Studio 5.1 music sounds horrible through dipoles compared to hearing it through 4 matched towers w/center. My dipoles are in a flat/square-backed box that hangs on screws in the wall. They have one front-firing sealed woofer that EQ's down to 40Hz in auto-cal, and two angular-firing tweeters wired out of phase with each other. I found the effect of the out-of-phase tweeters pointing in different directions to be plenty of decorrelation, even though my old/damaged hearing cuts out at 11KHz. I suppose dipoles could be distracting for the younger crowd that can still hear tweeters.

3) The size of the room affects the size of the speaker. No one listens to headphones with 12" woofers in them. Smaller rooms require smaller speakers. Large multi-driver towers with side-firing woofers sound terrible close up in a small room. The drivers are all pointing in different directions and need space for their 'dispersion cones' to disperse and overlap each other so that they all are heard at the same sound pressure level across the full spectrum. Large, bass-heavy woofers and cabinets overpower a small room with too much boundary reinforcement and cause muddy bass even at a distance. Besides, who wants to squeeze through a room crammed with speakers? There is no hard/fast rule on speaker size. It is all relative. Using dipoles to decorrelate the sound and make it seem farther away is one solution. Putting small speakers on/in the wall is another.

4) The more channels you have, the less dipoles contribute. All the synthesized channels (no discrete data in the stream for a given speaker) already include decorrelation and ambiance effects in the surround algorithm that derives the synthesized channels. It even decorrelates the channels with discrete information, since it 'steals' information from them and 'steers' it to the synthesized channels as well as blending the space between discrete channels with user-adjustable panorama. Besides, recording engineers also add ambiance and echo to their mixes to enrich the surround experience. Even without the use of 'sound mode' algorithmic effects or 'recording-engineer-induced' ambiance effects on channels that reproduce discrete information from the bitstream (as opposed to synthesized channels that are created from other 'discrete' channels), adding more and more channels creates more and more point sources in the room, creating a more immersive experience regardless of any deliberate enhancement to the ambient content of any single channel. Now that I have an 11.1 system with dual subwoofers, I feel no need to consider dipoles any longer. The decorrelation and ambiance steering capability of the advanced 11-channel surround algorithms is adequate to de-locate the side/rear surround channels just as it does the same for the front wide/high channels. Dipoles need to be removed from 11-channel surround specifications because they muddy the sound and Audyssey even warns against using them for their own extracted wide/high channels. I suspect that multiple monopoles on a long side wall is a better approach for 11-channel systems, if the room allows. The point is that as the technology advances, the job that dipoles used to do is now better handled in the DSP. With the move to object-oriented sound and with the advanced sound processing capability and multichannel capability of commercial sound studio effects, dipoles are no longer relevant. They might be part of a quaint retro 5.1 or 7.1 solution with old VCR source material in Pro Logic, but for a modern home theater running 11 or more channels with discrete sources on most of them and advanced DSP extracting ambiance for the rest of them, dipoles are a step backward. If your speakers are too close, buy smaller speakers and hang them on/in the walls. Forget dipoles for a modern installation unless you really object to the sound of a surround speaker in your ear or behind your head.

5) One factor no one seems to talk about is the horrendous sound of the average center channel. They all sound bad compared to the front towers unless we are talking major ordinance here for $$$. I addressed this issue by mounting two additional towers on a shelf on their sides for a center channel speaker, with the MTM arrays next to each other and the side-firing woofers pointed up. The sound of my center channel then approximated the sound of my front towers and the front image cleaned up considerably, even though the center channel is so high (above my TV) that it masks the front high channels. Unfortunately, now that I am moving to front projection, not only do I not have room to mount these tower speakers horizontally over my TV, I also have to horizontally-mount my front left/right towers BELOW my screen to get them out of the way of the picture. This means stacking center and left/right horizontally-mounted speakers on top of each other below the screen, or reverting to the lousy original center channel and placing it between the two horizontal front left/right straddling the subwoofers and equipment/tv stand. I have no room to hang an acoustically transparent screen in front of the speakers. The image would be in my lap and anyway I am so short on budget that I prefer to hang a cheap fixed screen on the wall. Hopefully, the contribution of the front high/wide speakers, and the 'screen-centered dialog' panaorama control, and the horizontally-mounted front towers in the same orientation and height as the MTM center channel, and the dual subwoofers with 80Hz THX crossover, will smooth out the front soundstage enough that trucks rolling by do seem to go in a straight line, and dialog no longer sounds like it is emanating from a barrel, due to a lousy, boomy, two-way center channel.

6) I also had to come up with a custom stand solution for my side surround dipoles. I tied them to floor stands with bungees. They were so thin they would just topple off the stands. The side walls were located in the wrong place. One was too far away and the only place to mount the dipole was on a stand. It was also adjacent to a walkway so it had to be quite close to the sofa. To match its distance, the other dipole also had to be on a close stand rather than on the wall slightly further away. They were both too close and at ear height instead of above the head as specified, and the rear dipoles were too close also, directly behind and above my head, so I had many compromises going on all at once. The woofers cut out at 80Hz when stand-mounted instead of at 40Hz. The wall behind them really is a critical part of the cabinet design. Now that I have 11.1 with dual subwoofer and front projection, space in front is at a premium so I am going back to a conventional 2-way MTM center channel, and I find myself with two extra pair of towers so I am going with all 11 monopoles and putting the dipoles in storage.

I suppose I tried just about everything in terms of speaker choice and placement (that fit my low budget anyway). So I guess the final point here is that there are no hard and fast rules in this game. It is all about compromises between imperfect solutions that each have their strengths and weaknesses. It is all about prioritizing to your need/desire and analyzing/trying your alternatives to make an informed choice, not just a matter of taste or preference but truly an engineering exercise in optimization the solution to the problem. Since cost is a major consideration for most people, I guess I would say that dipoles can be a great enhancement for people in smallish rooms with a desire to emulate a larger space, at a cost of smeared rear sound stage imaging. Otherwise, use monopoles, multiple monopoles, or even bipoles, depending on how your solution is constrained by space, source material, and budget. Also, the more channels you are using, the more speakers you have in the room, with enhanced sound modes that provide all the synthesized decorrelation and ambiance you need. With more speakers, their individual shortcomings of each speaker are less critical to the imaging too, because they all work together to create an image in space.

I took advantage of this fact when I chose used Sapphire speakers (at $100 each, average price) and used SVS dual subwoofers. Even though Sapphires are only 'consumer' quality, they have fairly linear frequency response and lack the bass-heavy twinkly-treble over-emphasized (i.e. no midrange) presentation of most big-box speakers. (Note, when you listen to a speaker at low volume without any loudness compensation, it should sound midrangy because of the way hearing works. Only at reference will you hear balanced frequency response without any loudness compensation algorithm. Speakers that sound naturally deep bassy and twinkly trebly at low volume are actually distorting the sound.) At 80Hz THX crossover and with SVS subwoofers that really hit 20Hz without attenuation or boom, I can afford to use tower/bookshelf speakers that lack solid deep bass and take advantage of the (relative) linearity of the Sapphire tower sound. The front wide/high sound fine with bookshelf speakers since they are just extracted ambiance anyway and specified wall/ceiling mount. For an 11.1 system I had no other reasonable choice but to find a source of cheap used speakers for approximately $100 each, and just live with the lack of cabinet bracing and (relatively) cheap drivers, relying on the crossover design of the speakers and receiver auto EQ to minimize any nasty resonances or dips. I could easily have spent $2200 for inferior-sounding new speakers when I spent only $1100 and got better sound without going into even more debt. Imagine if I paid $1000 per speaker. I could get a decent car for that money. The one speaker I did not compromise on was the subwoofer, because a cheap subwoofer is an oxymoron. I did manage to get them at half price used though.

Hard choices. That is what choosing speakers is all about.

I hope that my experiments help someone. I spent a lot of time and money (relative to my circumstances anyway) playing around with equipment to reach these conclusions.

Forget about following in my footsteps and buying lots of used Sapphires for your own budget 11.1 system. I bought them already. The inventory seems to be almost exhausted now. Try using Infinity Primus. Good budget speaker, new it only costs twice what I paid for used Sapphires and the line includes everything except the dipoles that you do not need anyway.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #644 of 737 Old 06-03-2014, 10:30 AM
Member
 
Benjitb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: U.K
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28

I've been using my 5 channel setup for a while now and have found the best sound for the setup. Rears opposite the fronts (1 1/2 feet above), with the rears set to Dipole (out of phase). This makes the sound significantly better than in bipole mode and creates an all encommpassing feel. In Bipole with its like sitting in a 5 channel setup, but in Dipole its hard to work out where it all starts and begins such is the immerssion.

 

Happy Listening.


Yamaha RX V-475

Monitor Audio Bronze BX2   Speakers

Monitor Audio Bronze BX     Centre

Monitor Audio Bronze BRFX Rears

FAT PS3

 

Sans subwoofer

Benjitb is offline  
post #645 of 737 Old 06-10-2014, 02:56 PM
Senior Member
 
wyattroa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Alright quick question. Currently I have a 5.1 setup. My surrounds are 7 feet outside the listening area and 90 degrees to the side. They are 3ft above ear level and shooting straight across to eachother.

Now I see the likes of JBL pro speaker and JTR who sell slanted surround speakers like the slanted 8. I have the ability with my hanging ceiling mount and my JBL L820 to slant them if I want to, but am not sure if this is ideal or not. What is the difference? I thought they were supposed to be aimed directly at eachother.
Robert

Sub build http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...et-r-done.html
Center - JBL LC2
Mains - JBL L820
Surrounds - JBL L820
Sub -Updating to Duals with UXL-18"s A bit different
wyattroa is offline  
post #646 of 737 Old 06-16-2014, 02:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 3,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by danielrg

Get surrounds from the same make and model line to timbre match. When surround formats migrate to object based techniques you will be glad you did. The next thing: get monopoles if you possibly can because positional cues are in the mix and you don't want the surround speaker's diffuse dispersal pattern messing that up. That may mean bookshelves depending on the brand and how many types of speakers are in their lineup.

Not always possible. Some brands don't release matching surround speakers, if they do they're either floorstanders, standmounts- so not ideal.

My side & surrounds aren't matching, nor do they match the front three. Can't be helped.

Also "get monopoles" isn't always ideal either, I had monopoles for surrounds. Didn't like them. Monopoles are too distracting, non direct speakers work better in my room, with the distance I'm away from them. Perhaps if you had 6'+ space, that would help. However in most homes the side/surrounds are close to the listening position.

Krell Evolution 900e x 7

Bose Jewel speakers.

 

Jealous of my speakers?

fatbottom is online now  
post #647 of 737 Old 06-16-2014, 09:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbottom View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by danielrg

Get surrounds from the same make and model line to timbre match. When surround formats migrate to object based techniques you will be glad you did. The next thing: get monopoles if you possibly can because positional cues are in the mix and you don't want the surround speaker's diffuse dispersal pattern messing that up. That may mean bookshelves depending on the brand and how many types of speakers are in their lineup.

Not always possible. Some brands don't release matching surround speakers, if they do they're either floorstanders, standmounts- so not ideal.

My side & surrounds aren't matching, nor do they match the front three. Can't be helped.

Also "get monopoles" isn't always ideal either, I had monopoles for surrounds. Didn't like them. Monopoles are too distracting, non direct speakers work better in my room, with the distance I'm away from them. Perhaps if you had 6'+ space, that would help. However in most homes the side/surrounds are close to the listening position.
Monopoles work best with object based surround, which is coming. Audio x/y/z axis rendering doesn't quite work like traditional channel-only based surround. Speaker diffusion can mess up the 3D sound cues embedded in these advanced audio tracks.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #648 of 737 Old 06-16-2014, 01:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 3,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 172
again what works on paper doesn't work in-situ. I would not change di/bi to monopoles, just because Dolby/DTS labs say so. Perhaps dipole could be replaced with bipole, if you don't like the reversed phase effect.

Krell Evolution 900e x 7

Bose Jewel speakers.

 

Jealous of my speakers?

fatbottom is online now  
post #649 of 737 Old 06-16-2014, 04:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbottom View Post
again what works on paper doesn't work in-situ. I would not change di/bi to monopoles, just because Dolby/DTS labs say so. Perhaps dipole could be replaced with bipole, if you don't like the reversed phase effect.
It's not what's on paper, it's what the particular 3D mixing technology requires in actual use. Diffuse speakers muddy up the sound field created by multi-positional object rendering.

All press demos conducted thus far for at-home Dolby Atmos and DTS-UHD, and all mixing facilities designed for object surround use timbre matched monopoles... and more of them. The more speakers you have, the better the 3D effect.

You can definitely use whatever traditional speakers are a part of a current setup, but the subsequent audio experience will not be optimal.

If someone is contemplating building a surround speaker system then object audio and its more stringent requirements should be part of any buying decision.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 06-16-2014 at 04:42 PM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #650 of 737 Old 06-16-2014, 11:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 3,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
It's not what's on paper, it's what the particular 3D mixing technology requires in actual use. Diffuse speakers muddy up the sound field created by multi-positional object rendering.

All press demos conducted thus far for at-home Dolby Atmos and DTS-UHD, and all mixing facilities designed for object surround use timbre matched monopoles... and more of them. The more speakers you have, the better the 3D effect.

You can definitely use whatever traditional speakers are a part of a current setup, but the subsequent audio experience will not be optimal.

If someone is contemplating building a surround speaker system then object audio and its more stringent requirements should be part of any buying decision.
Have you tried bipole, dipole or tripole speakers?

Are you close to the side/rear walls?

Krell Evolution 900e x 7

Bose Jewel speakers.

 

Jealous of my speakers?

fatbottom is online now  
post #651 of 737 Old 06-17-2014, 12:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbottom View Post
Have you tried bipole, dipole or tripole speakers?

Are you close to the side/rear walls?
I've sat in home theaters with all three. As of right now, my system is not set up. My living situation has had to change due to the economy.

Not a fan of dipoles... but remember, dipoles were designed when surround for the home consisted of Dolby Stereo with a matrixed mono surround ambiance. It needed a fake stereo effect to give it some sort of dimensionality due to the poor separation of front and rear sounds and its monaural aspect.

3D audio, again, is a whole new animal. In order to really get anything beneficial out of it beyond the normal channel based systems, you need more speakers (side wall, rear wall, and ceiling, especially) rather than a pair of out of phase dipoles. 3D audio, at its best, has far more positional cues for height, width, and depth than current linear channel based systems. There is also a great deal more opportunity to shift dialog into other speakers around the room, so tonal matching is a must. Sound engineers tried this with Gravity's Atmos mix... and it really opened up the soundfield for greater dimensionality. Gravity also won two technical Oscars for sound... after experiencing it in Atmos I can understand why.

You could not pull off a cohesive object track like that with mismatched speakers for timbre and diffusion.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 06-17-2014 at 12:32 AM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #652 of 737 Old 06-17-2014, 02:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 3,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 172
I'm fully aware diffused speakers were used in Pro-Logic era . In fact I had monopoles before I bought the diffused speakers, had Dolby Digital and didn't like the monopole surround effect. It's just too distracting. This is correctly calibrated not with rears +10dB.

Also as for matching, not always possible. Not all brands have matching center and surround speakers, or in di/tri/bi pole configuration.

Personally it depends on the room, distance to speakers, and personal preference. Also considering most people's home theatre is the living room, there is already a compromise anyway, and surround speakers fit into the decor better than four floorstanders lol

You can't buy matching side and surround speakers for my speakers either (wall mount monopole, dipole, bipole, or tripole)

Or especially now the speakers are end of line.

Plus surround speakers are usually thinner, and have built in wall mount brackets, with monopoles they're twice as deep, and in all three homes I've seen a home theatre, bookshelf/standmount monopoles would get in the way, even if they're on speaker stands or wall stands.

Krell Evolution 900e x 7

Bose Jewel speakers.

 

Jealous of my speakers?

fatbottom is online now  
post #653 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 07:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Hi guys I have 2 spare center speakers which is the energy RC LCR. And I am planning them for my surrounds. Is it okay if I can place them horizontally for my surrounds or back surrounds? Thanks
caloyzki is offline  
post #654 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 10:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post
Hi guys I have 2 spare center speakers which is the energy RC LCR. And I am planning them for my surrounds. Is it okay if I can place them horizontally for my surrounds or back surrounds? Thanks
Any particular reason why you need to place them horizontally as surrounds? They are L/C/R... made for all three positions as timbre matched monitors, so most likely designed for vertical placement for optimal sound dispersal.

And what are your other speakers?

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 06-22-2014 at 10:34 AM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #655 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 12:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Any particular reason why you need to place them horizontally as surrounds? They are L/C/R... made for all three positions as timbre matched monitors, so most likely designed for vertical placement for optimal sound dispersal.

And what are your other speakers?
Because of my room placement. Small room with couch against the wall. My speakers are energy rc 70 fronts, energy V2.0C center, energy V2.0R surrounds dipole/bipole/direct and energy rc lcr rear surrounds.
caloyzki is offline  
post #656 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 12:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post
Because of my room placement. Small room with couch against the wall. My speakers are energy rc 70 fronts, energy V2.0C center, energy V2.0R surrounds dipole/bipole/direct and energy rc lcr rear surrounds.
Can you send some pictures of the room? It seems like you have all the speaker bases covered, except for using the RC's for left and right that don't timbre match with the rest of the Veritas system.

Are you wanting to switch out your current surrounds with those older RC speakers? Personally, I wouldn't and instead look at getting the matching Veritas L/R speakers. You really don't want to mix and match speakers like this, especially with newer surround formats coming to the market that REALLY stress timbre matching across the entire system.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #657 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Can you send some pictures of the room? It seems like you have all the speaker bases covered, except for using the RC's for left and right that don't timbre match with the rest of the Veritas system.

Are you wanting to switch out your current surrounds with those older RC speakers? Personally, I wouldn't and instead look at getting the matching Veritas L/R speakers. You really don't want to mix and match speakers like this, especially with newer surround formats coming to the market that REALLY stress timbre matching across the entire system.
Here is my set up now. Running 5.1 at the moment. Using the energy v2.0r as my surrounds.im planning to put the 2 rc lcr on that middle of the 2 surrounds at the back of the couch. Dont know if I can place them verically coz its too high. Thats why planning to place them horizontaly if its okay.
IMG_20140622_160239.jpg

IMG_20140622_160215.jpg

ps : with 7.1 pics that was before and I decided to removed them and planning to place horizontal.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20140428_205144.jpg (153.3 KB, 7 views)

Energy RC 70 fronts
Energy RC LCR center
Energy RC LCR surrounds
Rythmik LV12R and Mirage Omni 12 subwoofers
Denon 2112CI

Last edited by caloyzki; 06-22-2014 at 01:11 PM.
caloyzki is offline  
post #658 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post
Here is my set up now. Running 5.1 at the moment. Using the energy v2.0r as my surrounds.im planning to put the 2 rc lcr on that middle of the 2 surrounds at the back of the couch. Dont know if I can place them verically coz its too high. Thats why planning to place them horizontaly if its okay.
Attachment 131122

Attachment 131130

ps : with 7.1 pics that was before and I decided to removed them and planning to place horizontal.
You have very, very limited space to do 7.1 properly. Here's what I would do. Keep your couch pulled a little bit away from the wall and put your side surrounds at the 110 degree locations as seen here:



It's better to have great 5.1 than poorly implemented 7.1. You need a longer room, my friend.

Keep the RC L/C/R's and perhaps use them as wide front side surrounds or height speakers for upcoming object based surround formats (Dolby Atmos or DTS-UHD -- it is almost guaranteed they'll have front wide surround and top/ceiling speaker positions with discrete information coming out of every speaker)... or if you can't wait... for a receiver or pre-amp that can do DTS Neo:X synthetic matrix post-processing now.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!

Last edited by Dan Hitchman; 06-22-2014 at 02:15 PM.
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #659 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 02:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
caloyzki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
You have very, very limited space to do 7.1 properly. Here's what I would do. Keep your couch pulled a little bit away from the wall and put your side surrounds at the 110 degree locations as seen here:



It's better to have great 5.1 than poorly implemented 7.1. You need a longer room, my friend.

Keep the RC L/C/R's and perhaps use them as wide front side surrounds or height speakers for upcoming object based surround formats (Dolby Atmos or DTS-UHD -- it is almost guaranteed they'll have front wide surround and top/ceiling speaker positions with discrete information coming out of every speaker)... or if you can't wait... for a receiver or pre-amp than can do DTS Neo:X synthetic matrix post-processing now.
Thanks for the heads up. Okay for now im sticking with 5.1. So its better for.me to use the v2.0r as my surrounds right? is the atmos will be on the next features avr? I cant do wides or heights on my avr I only have denon 2112ci.
caloyzki is offline  
post #660 of 737 Old 06-22-2014, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by caloyzki View Post
Thanks for the heads up. Okay for now im sticking with 5.1. So its better for.me to use the v2.0r as my surrounds right? is the atmos will be on the next features avr? I cant do wides or heights on my avr I only have denon 2112ci.
Yeah, I would use the V2.0r's for your side surrounds. I would switch them to bipole mode, but that's a subjective audio taste. Never did like the really diffuse, out-of-phase dipole sound.

Dolby Atmos and DTS-UHD are probably going to be implemented in Ultra High Def. (2160p) media. So, possibly in the 2015/2016 time frame to coincide with this roll out. I don't expect to see object-based 3D surround added to current 1080p Blu-ray discs before UHD discs and/or downloads show up... unless the industry surprises everyone (don't bet on it).

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
Reply Speakers

Tags
Infinity Es 250 Bipole Dipole Dual Monopole Surround Speaker

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off